Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Hi NIgel, Thank you, I tend to do a backup in the office on the much faster LAN as often as they are in the office, but with COVID most employees are shelereing at home, and so I am relying on 'copy'* [new or changed files only] as it's over some slower Broadband WAN, some staff are on 8Mb down and 23 Mb up 😮 !! I am filtering our MacBook USER folders such as Music, Photos, Downloads, iMail, Caches... We do have some external drives attached, for onsite and offsite [removable] use. Just so we don't have One backup only 😮 🙂 And some in the OneDrive or DROPBOX , etc ... Cloud. We do have 500k to 2.5M files in these copy/Archives we are 'updating'* our backups to. Yes, there are a lot of small files for local Server HD to External HD; 30Gb to 190Gb on a Wed, Sat, Sun. ...but not so? for the USERs MacBooks HD over the WAN to Server HD's; 1Gb to 4Gb bi/tri-weekdaily. Hi David, Thank you, I must look more and do some knowledge/training tests into 'using the Recycle media action on a Backup script'. We do have Mac Sharing on this Mini-Mac Server running Retrospect Server. I have that set to SMB [as AFP sems rather unstable] so maybe that is where the Windows processes are being recognised? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I guess we just have a lot of files! And Im do a lot of copies on.off site... because I worry 🙂 But saving time on comparing file states or thorough verification is the best help or time-saving I can see at the moment?
  3. Was it the thread in which this post is the OP? The only post in that thread that isn't by the OP or me is this one by mbennett, but he's from Fair Grove MO—not Helsingborg in Sweden—so he's not Lennart_T. What the OP was reporting doing in that thread was indeed weird, though—and obsolete.
  4. Yesterday
  5. It was something about backing up (or to!) a NAS volume and seemed weird at first but obvious in (hah!) retrospect. Using Windows settings because it was an SMB mount? Using Mac settings because, although it was a Windows server, it was mounted on a Mac? Whatever it was, red's posted status message is pretty Windows specific and while I don't hold out much hope changing that client setting will help, it won't hurt either -- so even a tiny chance of success makes it worth a try.
  6. redleader, I was going to ask the same question that Nigel Smith did in the second paragraph of his second post, but he beat me to it while I was out buying apples in my local farmers' market (the apple-growing farmers' employees, who are mostly Tibetan immigrants, bring the apples from upstate New York—rather than growing them in Manhattan). And now you've provided the answer in your latest reply. A few hours ago I started to create a test Copy script; Back up System State—described on page 101 of the Retrospect Mac 17 User's Guide—is automatically checked under Source->Windows on the Options tab. As Nigel Smith suggests in his first post, you might try unchecking that option. I've done some Forums searches, but I can't find any post by Lennart_T that "found some unexpected 'leakage' between client settings a while back". If—after swearing on the head of Her Majesty QE II (which I'm sure your fellow Brit would insist on 🤣) that Users on Michael's MacBook Pro doesn't contain any Windows files—you want to create a Support Case for a bug, here's why and how to do it. Since MB MICHAEL 2018 seems to be a dedicated "backup" folder on your "backup server" FS SERVER DATA 02, you might instead consider replacing the copied files and folders with a Media Set on that "backup" folder to be the daily Destination using the Recycle media action on a Backup script. I actually do that every Saturday morning for my MacBook Pro "client", except that my Destination is inside the "Retrospect" folder on a portable HDD (which, after 6 subsequent incremental daily backups using No Media Action, I carry off to a week's holiday in my bank safe deposit box before bringing it back to sit for a week in my apartment before being used again). Nigel Smith has now suggested in his third post, which he just sneaked in while I was taking a long phone call, what I do. The Saturday morning Recycle Backup of my MBP backs up 71.1GB over 3.3 hours, not including a 0.7 hour compare phase (which I do because I'm a worrywart who used to back up to tape). That's 739K individual files, not your piddling 37K. I don't mess with grooming, because having 2 complete backups of my MBP—one (offsite) less than a week old and one less than 2 weeks old—to supplement the portable drive cabled to my "backup server" is adequate for my needs.
  7. So are you doing a Copy that replaces everything with what's "currently" on the MacBook (and other clients), or just replacing the ~30% of files that have changed and leaving the unchanged files in place? Is it 30% of files, or 30% of data? Are you applying any filters? Are you, perhaps, backing up huge numbers of small cache files that you don't really need to copy, or some big files which actually only change in small ways (databases, VM images) that could be handled better? Could you just add a couple of external USB drives to the server and increase your capacity? If you could get the stage where you can store all the weekday incrementals, groom the set down over the weekend, then start again with incrementals the next Monday, that would probably make your life easier. Lots of very small operations, like one-by-one file metadata updates, can be ridiculously slow over a remote link. The more you can minimise them the happier you'll be.
  8. We don't have the space for incremental backup ... 30% of the files change almost daily ... it would soon fill even large drives. A backup Worm might work, but I;ve never figured that one out yet.
  9. Give that Windows client setting a go anyway -- IIRC, Lennart found some unexpected "leakage" between client settings a while back. Or it may just be mis-reporting its activity and is actually setting ACLs etc on the copied files. Possibly a dumb question -- but why a copy operation rather than a backup? That would probably be a lot faster, especially since it wouldn't have to reset metadata on each of the thousands of small files in your Library folder (which, I suspect, is the problem).
  10. Thank you Nigel, and apologises for forgetting specs: All Macs OSX Mojave 10.14.latest Retrospect 17.0.latest for both Client and Server Copying from Mac HD Client to Mac HD Server. Either on the LAN or over the WAN. Nothing Windows involved.
  11. Weird -- that's an option in the Windows client section. You could try turning it off there and seeing if it makes any difference. Version of RS server, version of client, and OS version of both would be a help here. Also info about the destination -- you're not trying to "copy" to a Windows share, are you?
  12. 'duplicate state information' I cannot see where to turn this off. I think I do have it off 😮 It adds soooo much time to a full backup run. I'd rather live without it set especially over remote backups.
  13. Last week
  14. DavidHertzberg

    Backup set located on site to site VPN

    The paragraph above, in my first post in this thread, is the only thing I wrote that could be considered "rude and disrespectful". But it had the effect I intended, which was to get you to supply the missing information in a post directly following it. Once you'd done that, Lennart_T and I and Nigel Smith were able to diagnose your problem—which is why I wrote "Do you see how much better help you get when you calm down long enough to explain what you're trying to do? 😀" at the top of my next post in the thread. Nobody can give you "an idea whats going on here" if you don't supply the necessary information, and I will always consider it "rude and disrespectful" for you—or anyone else—to expect people on these Forums to do so. You were probably very frustrated when you wrote that OP, but I don't consider that a sufficient excuse. You should try volunteering to answer other administrators' questions on these Forums; you'll soon understand my attitude toward administrators who don't supply the necessary information. You will also develop a "psychic" ability to read an administrator's "tone, demeanor and thoughts just by reading a few words on a screen", and by reading his/her past posts as well—as I did in this thread to guess what you were doing. I'm sorry to inform you that employees of Retrospect "Inc." haven't been reading these Forums for the past couple of years, and—unlike some other websites—there aren't any volunteer Forums administrators. So if you want to make—after 3 months 😲—a complaint about me, you'll need to create a Support Case for the head of Retrospect Tech Support to read. Here's how to create a Support Case for a bug—the closest equivalent; select "Forums" in the appropriate drop-down.
  15. prophoto

    Backup set located on site to site VPN

    Amazing how rude and disrespectful some people can be when they hide behind a keyboard. Admins, we have an amazing psychic here in david, we should have him fix everyone's problems lie a savant? He can read my tone, demeanor and thoughts just by reading a few words on a screen! Retrospect doesn't need people like him here. Thanks for voicing your assumptions, you've showed us who you really are. Sad!
  16. Earlier
  17. Nigel Smith

    granular restore options

    Can't say I'd noticed that -- but then, I can't remember the last time I used the "overwrite older" option outside of a testing scenario. If you can describe the situation you're finding yourself in I'll see if I can replicate it, and what the results are.
  18. DavidHertzberg

    granular restore options

    (Disclaimer: Anything I may say about the intentions of Retrospect "Inc." in this or any other post is merely the result of "reading the tea leaves", the "tea leaves" being documentation and public announcements supplemented by an occasional morsel from Retrospect Sales. I have never been paid a penny by Retrospect "Inc." or its predecessors, and I pay for my upgrades. Any judgements expressed are—obviously—mine alone. The same is true of Retrospect's history, especially here.) redleader, There used to be an explanation of those granular Restore options on pages 129–130 of the Retrospect Mac 16 User's Guide, following the phrase "Choose one of these:" (that phrase still remains 🙄 )in step 6. However the explanatory indented paragraphs below the phrase were deleted on page 115 of the Retrospect Mac 17 UG by the StorCentric Slasher (who is in reality probably a direct employee of Retrospect "Inc."). The Slasher evidently had to make room in the UG for 30 pages of new Appendixes that were copied from Knowledge Base articles explaining "go big or go home" features—pages that IMHO should have been added to the UG when the features were introduced in 2018—without unduly expanding the size of the UG. However a version of that options explanation—including 'Replace if Backup Set is newer'—still remains on page 117 of the Retrospect Windows 17 User's Guide, which was previously more than doubled in size in 2012 for reasons explained in the 3rd paragraph of this later-deleted section of a Wikipedia article. But that explanation depends on the term "Snapshot", which is explained in the fifth paragraph of this also-later-deleted section of the Wikipedia article. As that paragraph also says, "Snapshot" was—as used from 1990 onward: That elimination of "Snapshot" was done in 2008 by the Tyrannical Terminologist 🤣 (my name for a developer whom an old-timer in Retrospect Sales says played a key role in the re-design of Retrospect Mac 8). That developer was prescient; Apple APFS's "snapshots" mean something different than Retrospect's, and something similar to Microsoft Windows' "snapshots". As a Glossary entry on pages 229–230 of the Retrospect Mac 17 UG says: IIRC I've never used the 'Only overwrite older files' option, so I've no idea whether it works. However nobody's posted a Forums complaint about it not working. If Mac 16 UG page 99 Use Attribute Modification Date When Matching doesn't work, here's why and how to submit a Support Case for a bug. Regardless, of whether the option works, you may also want to submit a Support Case for a Retrospect Mac documentation deficiency; here's why and how to do that. In doing that, you'll have to deal head-on with the term "Snapshot" having been banned in Retrospect Mac since 2009. The last two paragraphs of this post in another thread discuss my proposal—made in response to my earlier post in that thread about the meaning in the Retrospect Windows UG of the undefined term "active Snapshot"—that Retrospect "Inc." replace the term "Snapshot" with "Manifest". That replacement would have to be in the "backup server" Engine as well as in the GUI for both variants of Retrospect, because the Engine is basically common code for the two variants. If you doubt Engine code is common, look at a running Retrospect Mac Backup script—where you'll see "Updating Snapshot" and "Copying Snapshot" displayed on the Console as phases of the backup. That's why I suggested "Manifest", which has the same 8-letter-length as "Snapshot".
  19. I've been through the User Manual and there is no explanation of these 3 options. https://www.retrospect.com/uk/documentation/user_guide/mac/quick_start#restore Can someone explain them please?... see screenshot. 'Only overwrite older files' from experience just Restores the whole folder contents from the Backup Tapes again and makes no intelligent decisions on the files/folders already in the restore destination folder.
  20. DavidHertzberg

    Console 16.1 erases client options

    Don Lee, Upgrade immediately to Retrospect Mac 16.6. Don't pass "Go", don't collect $119 🤣 —which I assume you already paid for a Desktop Edition upgrade. Retrospect Console 16.1 has "joined the choir invisible". Why are you using it? 🙄 I've been totally on Retrospect Mac 16.6 since December 2019. A fast eyeball search of the Retrospect Mac cumulative Release Notes doesn't disclose a fix for your 16.1 Console bug. However a number of existing features ended up broken in the 15.0–16.5 "go big or go home" era of Retrospect development; most of them seem to have been fixed by 16.6. As the first long paragraph of this post in another thread mentions, Retrospect "Inc." apparently isn't above obfuscating who discovered a Retrospect bug that backup administrators reported before it was fixed. 😎 So if an engineer discovered the bug noted in your OP and fixed it by 16.6, he wouldn't necessarily have put a mention of it into the Release Notes—because IMHO the engineers are ashamed of 30 years of inadequate alpha-testing.
  21. I upgraded my server to Retro 16.1 recently, and started using Console 16.1 as well. I immediately started having trouble with the options on the clients being cleared. All of the "Allow client to:" options would be cleared every time I "touched" a client with the console. This is not a problem with Retro console 14.6, nor console 16.6 It's pretty annoying on the 16.1 console.
  22. Followup: For other reasons I had to recycle the backup set. After the initial full backup of my system, I decided to recreate the "Find Files" restore as outlined previously and test it. It worked as expected and all files were restored. Greg
  23. DavidHertzberg

    Proactive job scheduling

    Jan Löwe, The head of Retrospect Tech Support did indeed reach out today, at what would be 5:24 a.m. California time. The second paragraph of his reply is: That sounds as if your bug was the one fixed in Retrospect Mac and Windows 17.5.1. As to who at Retrospect "inc." changed the bug title to be less informative, I'd better not speculate. I'd also be better off not speculating as to why QA testing supposedly (but see Jordan Shattuck's first e-mailed reply in my post directly above) discovered this bug after the 23 September release 17.5.0. However there is an Engine preference that specifies the maximum number (up to 16) of activity threads that can be running in parallel. So all an engineer had to do as an alpha-test is to set this preference to 3—leaving 2 for source "client" machine-drive combinations along with the thread for the Proactive "controller"—and then submit a script with 3 source "client" machine-drive combinations. Proper alpha-testing, including of the 17.0.0 "AI" speedup, should have caught this bug earlier. Everybody, The first paragraph of his reply is: As stated in the post directly above, I originally contacted Retrospect "inc." about bug #8893 by using the messaging facility newly made available to readers of the cumulative Release Notes—not via this Forum. All subsequent communications were via e-mail. So I guess the head of R. T. S. is annoyed that I mentioned my communications on this Forum. Be warned. Also be warned that my sending a message from the cumulative Release Notes web page resulted in "Jordan Shattuck" creating a separate Support Case containing my original message and the subsequent e-mails. Maybe that's the only way he/she has of communicating them to R. T. S.. OTOH hitting option 7 on the Retrospect phone line and typing in "Shatt" elicited a statement that no one whose last name starts with those letters is listed, so I guess Inside Sales Manager Jordan Shattuck is considered too junior—maybe because he still has hair 🤣—to have a separate phone extension.
  24. Nigel Smith

    Yet another -530 client not found error

    Hell yea -- if it goes wrong at work I may get fired, if it goes wrong at home I'm in in real trouble! The point is that I'd rather it go wrong now, and I know about it, so I can fix it, rather than after a few months of a "self-healing" client trying (and failing) to continue on as normal... Of course, in an ideal world we'd have both! I'm just a bit hot on unintended consequences at the moment since we've just found out that a problem (concurrent-use software licences not being released if a client crashed rather than was quit) that we mitigated (scheduled daily scripted restart of the licensing daemon to free the zombie licences) has come back to bite us (external dept with 2 licences on our server advising their users to launch the software on 2 different machines every day and not quit, so they were running up to 15 concurrent instances rather than 2). While we could have justified a slight over-use if ever audited, such a deliberate breach of the Ts&Cs could have had repercussions -- and indeed it has, since the external dept is now firewalled out to only allow 2 client IPs and their users have to fight for time on those machines rather than use their own.
  25. David's story is interesting. Prior to using Retrospect, I also had a "fling" with Backup Exec. Prior to doing disk-to-disk backup, I went through QIC-tape and then DAT tape backup machines. But LTO tape drives cost more than a so-so used car, and the tapes are darn expensive, so I "embraced the inevitable" and went to disk-to-disk backup. I do use a separate backup drive for each year, for the cost of maybe 2-3 LTO tape cartridges. That Ars Technica poster is a damn fool. Maybe he will be OK, and maybe he won't. At the time we got that Lenovo laptop for my wife, I was extremely pressed for time. For about $60, I got a Laplink utility that essentially migrated all the programs and config settings from the old system to the new one. From experience, that's 2 full day process.
  26. DavidHertzberg

    Yet another -530 client not found error

    Nigel Smith, Permit me to recount a personal story that will shed some light on I bought my first home computer in the Fall of 1988, preparatory to belatedly returning to college for 1.5 years to get a quickie BA in Computer Science. I bought a Mac because that's what my college recommended, and I followed that up with buying a Maynard QIC tape drive in February 1989. The backup software was not Retrospect but Maynstream—the ancestor of BE. My wife and I returned to NYC after I received my BA degree in the Spring of 1991; my wife had been using my original Mac for writing and drawing once I had bought a second Mac for myself in December 1989. In January 1992 I upgraded my Mac to System 7, following the Boston Computer Society Active Window recommendation to do so by wiping my backed-up HDD and installing System 7 from scratch. That worked fine, and my wife asked me to do the same for her Mac in February 1992. Maynstream couldn't read the Maynard backup I had made for her. I ended up shipping the backup tapes to Drive Savers, who managed to recover most of my wife's backed-up data for a charge of around $700 in 1992 U.S. currency. I bought a DAT tape drive in 1995, after a later disaster—whose details I can't remember—that resulted in my wife's permanently losing some of her Mac artwork, and have been running Retrospect with a Compare step every morning ever since—except 2010–2015 when I had no "backup server". (My now-ex-wife has continued to buy Macintoshes, and is using Time Machine for backup.) The applicable point of this story is that one has to be very careful about preserving the data—and applications—stored on a spouse's computer. It's possible that x509's wife has been using applications or Windows add-ons that came as part of the Lenovo "bloatware", which is why he would write "... but too much time has passed now." That's why I'd like to help him get a "self-healing" Retrospect Windows Client. A exact opposite of such carefulness is the attitude of the Ars Technica Other Hardware forum poster to whom I wrote the Private Message from which the story in the above lengthy paragraph is adapted (you didn't think I wrote it especially for this post, did you? 🤣 ). He is personally a Windows and Linux user, and wrote—of his wife and daughter's Macs—"computers that I don't want to support when a free alternative they can use to self-support exists. I'm not planning on throwing money away on a repeated basis buying upgrades to any potential software, I'm not planning on constantly making sure their backups are working, I'm not interested in walking them through periodic upgrades. If I can provide a service that they can use to self-support (the entire beauty of Time Machine) then I'm done. If Time Machine is unreliable, I'll cross that bridge when I get to it." I had cautiously suggested a client-server application (I'm not allowed to name Retrospect on the Ars forums except in one authorized Mac thread) for backing up to the NAS he wanted to buy, but ended up suggesting A**—a "push" backup application that would be enough for all his home computers.
  27. Nigel Smith

    Yet another -530 client not found error

    While I applaud your idea of "self-healing" Retrospect client, David, I can't help but feel it's like slapping a fresh bandage on a suppurating wound every morning -- far better to clean up the infection instead. Otherwise I fear that a relatively minor problem -- "I'm not getting backed up. Hmmm... Better fix that." -- could turn into a major one -- "I've had no alerts -- what do you mean my data hasn't been backed up for a month? My disk just failed!". Restarting a service manually may be a pain, though certainly less painful than a full reboot, but there are often unintended consequences -- and so, IMO, a choice the user should make.
  28. DavidHertzberg

    Proactive job scheduling

    Jan Löwe, Retrospect Windows 17.5.1.102 was released today. Its very-informative 🤣 entire entry in the cumulative Release Notes is: Is #8893 the bug number assigned to the Support Case that you submitted about Proactive job scheduling? P.S.: When I looked again at the cumulative Release Notes, they gave me an option to send a message. The first e-mailed reply, from "Jordan Shattuck", said After I replied to that e-mail, pointing out that I had initially read the Release Notes and describing your prominent position, I got back another e-mail saying I strongly suspect that "Jordan Shattuck" is actually a bot. Just what I needed, StorCentric! 🙄 Real people may reach out Monday.
  29. DavidHertzberg

    Yet another -530 client not found error

    I understand that, but x509 has been suffering with -530 errors on his wife's Lenovo Yoga 730 machine for at least a year—and I'd like to automate the relief process for him as well. I'd like nothing better than for him to do a clean install using a retail copy of Windows, but he says "I probably should have done the same [clean install] with my wife's system when it was new, but too much time has passed now." Restart Service is no doubt overkill (a choice of word not originally intended to be humorous 🤣 ) for all the other administrators having a -530 problem with Windows "clients" that aren't "blessed" with Lenovo "bloatware", but it would be effective. Maybe there could be a single "command line" script that would first determine if the Client was On. If it wasn't, the script would do a Restart Service. Either way, the script would then do a "ping" of the "ipsave address"; if the "ping" didn't work, it would turn the Client off and on again. The problem is that, if the Client were Off, it couldn't run the "command line" script—so the "command line" script would have to be run at the end of the machine boot process. I'd like to avoid having the Retrospect Client Installer put in a machine-boot-process "command line" script for all other administrators; maybe the Installer could determine if the "client" machine is a Lenovo. Alternatively, we—or R.T.S.—would have to give x509 a separate script to install on his wife's machine.
  1. Load more activity
×