offthewall

Thanks, it was that Upgrade Wizard I was unable to find. Looks like my upgrade is $499 Retrospect Upg Single Server Unltd Wkstn Clts v. 12 for Mac. I couldn't convince the purse string keepers to go for a support contract last time.

Is Retrospect 12 a free or paid upgrade from version 11? I can't seem to find that information. Thanks.

I have 8 Media disk sets setup. Four at a time are online. Two of them are missing all members (there is actually one for each) in the console. I tried the Repair function and pointed to the existing disk set file but nothing seems to happen and the set is still listed as having no members and backups request media. The console listing shows real usage of the sets but no members in the summary or "Members" tab. See screen shot.

Where are the Retrospect Secret Pref logs written to?

Restarting the engine or console (on both remote and server) does not cause the members to return. I enabled logging and will attach log to my existing ticket.

Has anyone noticed any 11.5 specific issues? I just upgraded my test machine and would like to know of any show stoppers before I put the production machines on 11.5 from 11.1.

I run the retro engine on 10.6.8 as well. Since that was the last real server OS from Apple, I believe there are probably a lot of Retrospect Server installs running on that OS.

I have a simple question to other users who have upgraded from 10 to 11. Does it work? Major Retrospect x.0 upgrades have been rather disastrous for me since the good old 6.x days. Before I jump, I'm just wondering if there are any show stoppers in 11.0. My gut tells me to wait for v 11.1 or even 11.2 based on my personal experience.

v 11.0.1 has not helped the repeated crashing and server disconnects I'm experiencing.

I enabled block level incremental backup on my main proactive user folder backup script. Looking through the logs to ensure backups are actually being completed, there are a couple of puzzling items. I've noticed that every source states "Backing up -27 files using block level incremental backup." "-27 files"?? What exactly does that mean? Is that an error message? A number of files? A dash? Also the "Completed", "Remaining", and "completed successfully" entries don't make a lot of sense to me when taken collectively. Why are there still 2145 files remaining, 318 files completed yet the script was completed successfully? Using Instant Scan Backing up -27 files using block level incremental backup. 3/12/14 3:45:54 PM: Snapshot stored, 323.3 MB 3/12/14 3:46:30 PM: Execution completed successfully Remaining: 2145 files, 381 MB Completed: 318 files, 419.5 MB, with 0% compression Performance: 449.5 MB/minute Duration: 00:30:29 (00:29:32 idle/loading/preparing) 3/12/14 3:46:35 PM: Script "User Home Folders - RAID 10.5" completed successfully

The backup set is an existing Disk set on a 12TB RAID created with Retrospect Macintosh v 10.5

That's somewhat relieving, I think...

Is it always the same negative numbers for you or does it vary?

The frequent console quitting of 10.0 was finally solved after working with Retrospect tech support and a couple of new builds, so I've gone backwards a bit there. I'm as excited about block level backups as I am fearful of enabling them until I hear from others that it's reliable.

Well, against my better judgement, I put v11 in. I seem to be having a repeat of many of the v10.0 issues I had; 1) The console is unexpectedly quitting often. 2) I'm attempting to upgrade the clients to v11 via the console and, like 10.x, the process seems hit or miss. Some clients will update, most will not. The ones than do update will not show the correct version until either the client is renamed (a trick I discovered with v 10.x) or the console restarted. 2/3 of the clients will not accept an upgrade via the console. I haven't visited each in person yet, but with 10.x, a manual update always worked.

I just upgraded from Retrospect 8 to 10. While 8 was no picnic, 10 is absurd. Performance in the console is SUPER slow, buggy and unresponsive both working locally on the server or over the network. I'm running on an OS Server 10.6.8 Xserve. 2x2.26 Quad Core Xenon with a light load of file sharing to 5-10 clients. Does anyone actually get backups done with this expensive garbage?

I have been running the pre-release V 10.2.0.196 for a couple of weeks now and Retrospect 10 performance is now back on par with V9 (a good thing). It is usable again for me on my two OSX 10.6.8 Servers.

Is there a test build or update available yet? I would LOVE to test it for you. The constant SPOD'ing is ever present with both of my installations. thx.

It's the latest Version 10.1.0 (221). All updates done. The issue is at the computer running the console not the engine. No client installed on the console machine. The freezes are in the console app.

I would definitely like to see a test build addressing this issue.

All my proactive backups are just sitting there stating "Waiting for failed attempt". The sources are on the network and ready and respond to a manual backup.

I restarted the engine and now they are all running again. Buggy stuff....

I am still seeing this behavior in V10. Two different engines at two different remote locations. The source and scripts list often get scrambled and I see a mixure of both engine's sources in the windows. I immediatly quit when this happens and it happens often.

I now have two completely different Retrospect installations experiencing the same horrible performance in the Console. Separate companies, different locations. The only thing in common is they are both running on an XServe with 10.6.8 OSX Server OS. This installation was also running V8 without this terrible lag. Can anyone at Retrospect comment on this?

Yes, your description of SPODs is what I mean by freezing. The problem is that the 10 second or more SPOD is followed by only a 1 or 2 sec period of responsiveness then the beach ball returns. It took me almost an hour to change the media set on 10 scripts this afternoon. You get that second or two to try to click what's needed and then you wind up clicking something that your were trying to click 15 minutes ago. Underneath, the backups are continuing at a decently fast pace.