Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:21:08 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Very slow SCSI tape drive with cygwin/Win2kPro Message-ID: <20040827122108.GP27978@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <200408270713 DOT 32596 DOT whn AT lopi DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200408270713.32596.whn@lopi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i On Aug 27 07:13, Bill Nugent wrote: > Hi Corinna, > > Setting tar's -b size up resulted in a radical increase. Still not > streaming but real close and workable. Reading in a 100GB tape with > 500MB to 1,500MB files should take about three or four hours instead of > three weeks! I'm going to keep experimenting to see if I can get it to > stream which should bring it down to 2 hours. Thank you! > > In experimenting I found '-b 20480' was "too large" and did not work. I > have not had a chance to determine at what size tar breaks. > > Any idea why I can't set the block size greater than 32K using > "mt setblk"? We have a number of tapes which have a 64K block size and So you didn't look into the `mt status 3' output? I've marked it in my original reply. It's the Windows driver value for the maximum block size. That has nothing to do with Cygwin. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/