On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 12:04:07PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > On 6/30/16 11:59 AM, Anthony l wrote: > > I don't think this is a multi tape dump. But then again i don't know for sure. I recently got a job and this is my first 'project'. I have about 10 tapes each are labeled a month and a year, so I don't think they are multi tape because they span like 3 years 2004-2007 . Although for the current tape I am working on right now if I select 1 skip, I'll get to another back up labeled "incremental backup 1" or something similar. Using the verbosity output here is what I got. (also using interactive restore). I went ahead and specified byte size 4096. Through earlier test using the dd command I determined that was the correct size. Ill post one without byte size specified too. I just saw it in that post and thought it might help. > > > > Here is the output with verbosity. > > > > http://pastebin.com/Nd6BqNc5 > > > > The out is the same with or without -b 4096. > > > > http://pastebin.com/0dxbCvyc (no -b) > > > interactively restore from this dump? > 1: skip > 2: interactively restore > (default) > ->2 > ++++================++++ > missing some stuff------ > > ^^^ is that your comment, or actual output? > > Looks like it eventually encountered a short read: > > xfsrestore: drive op: read: wanted 131072 (0x20000) > xfsrestore: tape op: reading 245760 bytes > xfsrestore: tape op read of 245760 bytes short: nread == 4096 > xfsrestore: tape op: get status > xfsrestore: tape status = wprot onl > xfsrestore: short read record 1 (nread == 4096) > xfsrestore: drive op read returning error rval=1 > > in dmesg, is there any sort of IO error from the tape? So xfs_reatore is wanting to find the session inventory in that last media file, and it would appear that it isn't there or shorter than expected. A tape problem, perhaps? Have you tried running xfs_restore using the minimal tape protocol (-m)? Another option is to try to restore the dump files from tape to a local file on disk and see if that can be parsed instead. The other thing you might want to do is upgrade xfsdump to the latest version - you're running 3.1.1 and the current version is 3.1.6. I doubt it will change the behaviour, but at least it will give us something to work from... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
