Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/17/2018 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    JamesOakley, It sure as heck gets more of their attention and memory than simply posting about a bug on this Forum, which nobody at Retrospect Inc. reads anymore (per CEO J.G.Heithcock). That fact is AFAIK one reason Retrospect Inc. instituted Support Requests; previously the organization had a sad record of often taking 4 years or so to fix bugs. Besides, how much time do you really need to spend on a Support Request? After supplying installation details that they definitely need to isolate the bug, all you need to do—as the post linked-to in the preceding paragraph says—is to copy-paste paragraphs from your post(s) here. You can upload screenshots as part of the Support Request. If you really want to get someone's attention, you can also phone Werner Walter as indicated in this post, or even send an e-mail to Brian Dunagan as indicated in this post. However I'm afraid that Brian truly needs to devote his full attention to organize the engineers in fixing this "bad release". I'm beginning to think that x509 may be right; that, in order to "play catch-up ball" after this situation (third and fourth paragraphs), Retrospect Inc. may have entrusted some enhancements to R. non-V. to developers in China—without ensuring thorough testing. I think I can safely say that the old-timers at Retrospect Inc. will be sufficiently be scared by knowing that they have put out a "bad release". If you read between the lines and follow the references in the second and third paragraphs of this article section, you will realize that Retrospect Mac practically "went down the tubes" as a product in 2009-2011 as a result of the "bad release"—one that was really the fault of EMC management rather than the developers— of Retrospect Mac 8.0. P.S.: In last sentence of first paragraph added link to Engst 2009 TidBITS overview of Retrospect Mac 8, where "Cracks in Retrospect’s architecture started to show ...." reflects delays in fixing bugs.
  2. 1 point
    x509 Do you have InstantScan running on the drives in question? I have encountered situations before where, although InstantScan is active and reports no detectable errors, the volume databases stops updating and so as far as Retrospect is concerned no new files have been added files have been added, changed, or deleted on the volume. When a file is added, changed or deleted the volume database should be updated fairly soon afterwards so if the file time stamp of the volume database is not updating then InstantScan is not updating. The InstantScan volume databases are in the C:\ProgramData\RetroISA\RetroISAScans folder. To reset stop the InstantScan services, delete the volume databases, the restart the InstantScan services.
  3. 1 point
    x509, One approach—especially if you were having the same problems with the Dashboard when you were running Retrospect Windows 12—is to follow the links from the second paragraph and P.S. of this post, and to do what one or the other of them says depending on whether you are running Proactive scripts (see mbennett's post below Lennart_T's if you are)—I'm only the messenger. The other approach is to contact Retrospect Support; I think you'd be entitled to personalized phone help because you evidently just upgraded to Retrospect Windows 15, but in any case you should file a Support Request because you're not the only administrator having this problem—see the OP of the thread linked to in the first paragraph of this post. See the rest of this post below for what IMHO might well be included in that Support Request: if you've been having the problems with the Dashboard only since you started running Retrospect Windows 15, I will now give you the benefit of a bit of informed speculation—as a Retrospect Mac administrator—on this subject. Back around 2007 EMC Insignia decided that a fully-interactive Administration Console, optionally running on a machine separate from the "backup server", is an essential component of an enterprise client-server backup application's user interface. The (by then) EMC Iomega engineers in Walnut Creek CA were able to successfully introduce an Administration Console in Retrospect Mac 8, but found that—because of mandatory security settings introduced with Windows Vista/Server 2008—they were unable to introduce an Administration Console in Retrospect Windows. The Dashboard was introduced in Retrospect Mac 11 as the first-appearing panel in the Retrospect Mac Console, and at the same time was introduced as a display-only feature of Retrospect Windows 9. The non-GUI code of Retrospect Windows and Retrospect Mac was meanwhile integrated with Retrospect Windows 7.7, and over a year ago administrator Don Lee discovered that he could almost perfectly control a Retrospect Windows "backup server" from a Retrospect Mac Console—because the inter-task communications capabilities had been carefully preserved in the Retrospect Windows code even though they can't be invoked from a Windows task. Meanwhile developers of other enterprise client-server backup applications have introduced Administration Consoles that get around the Windows security restrictions by running under a Web server, and Retrospect Inc. has been IMHO quietly desperate to compete with them. They were intending to introduce a beta version of the Retrospect Management Console in Retrospect 15.1, but were evidently delayed until Retrospect 15.5 by the need to have Retrospect immediately satisfy GDPR "right of erasure" requirements. For a few days last spring I ran a special test release of Retrospect Mac 15.0 to help the engineers diagnose the -530 bugs, and the Dashboard in that release had 3 blue icons on the upper-right—one of which could interactively start and stop a "backup server" Engine. So what I'm speculating—confirmed by this video—is that the Dashboard code in Retrospect Windows 15.6 has been enhanced under-the-hood to function as the Retrospect Management Console, and that this is what's causing your Dashboard problems. IMHO what will solve your problems until Retrospect Windows 16 would be the addition of a C:\ProgramData\Retrospect\retro.ini parameter line that reads something like DashboardNotAConsole=1 . Ask Tech Support if Engineering can give us that in a Retrospect Windows 15.7 release. An alternative would be to have the Dashboard code look at the Enable Management Console box in Preferences, as described in this Knowledge Base article, and act as if that parameter line were present if the box is not checked.
  4. 1 point
    According to the Blog, 15.6 was announced on Tuesday. https://www.retrospect.com/en/blog/2018/10/16/retrospect_15_6 It's available for download now. https://www.retrospect.com/en/support/downloads However: My 15.5 Desktop/Pro does not see an update available Mayoff hasn't announced it here QUESTION: Is the new version safe to download and use?
  5. 1 point
    An update will show in Automatic Update and a manual check for updates from within Retrospect a few weeks after initial release. This presumably to allow the early adopters who go looking for the update to find any problems before the rollout to the masses via Automatic Update. As for safe to download and use, well I downloaded and installed it and so far the update has run without problems for me. (YMMV.)
  6. 1 point
    Actually Monafly isn't misreading what he/she is reading in the Grooming dialog. Retrospect Mac 12 added a Months to Keep entry box to the Grooming dialog, which is described on page 9 of the Retrospect Mac 12 User's Guide. A quick test on my "backup server" shows that (as I expected for compatibility) clicking the Groom to Retrospect Defined Policy button causes Months to Keep to default to 12. Unfortunately that page was part of the "What's New" chapter, and the august Documentation Committee has adopted for the last 4 versions of the UGs a policy of totally overwriting the last version's "What's New" UG chapter with whatever is new in the current version of Retrospect—without copying the last version's "What's New" content to another UG chapter. I have mentioned that policy in other posts; a frank appraisal of it would require me to use the words "heads" and "wedged" and "up" and the third-person plural possessive of the name of the human excretory orifice, which of course I'm too polite to do.
  7. 1 point
    Wha is an "august Documentation Committee"? Sounds like fake news, if you ask me.