Jump to content

DavidHertzberg

Members
  • Content count

    673
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Everything posted by DavidHertzberg

  1. DavidHertzberg

    Amount of data not equal

    pronto, I found a thread in the recent-versions Retrospect Mac forum, ending with this post by a Retrospect Inc. employee. Copy Media Set is the Retrospect Mac equivalent of Transfer Backup Sets (this table had the terminology for the Retrospect Mac equivalents of Transfer Snapshots and Transfer Backup Sets reversed; I've just fixed it). Based on that post and preceding posts in its thread, if you are using the Recycle source Backup Set after successful transfer option (described most fully on page 372 of the Retrospect Windows 12 User's Guide) it might be a good idea to stop using it. Here's why and how to file a Support Case; Retrospect Tech Support almost certainly has someone who knows the German-language version.
  2. DavidHertzberg

    Amount of data not equal

    pronto, First, I hate to sound like a broken phonograph record, but what numeric version of Retrospect Windows are you running, and what version of Windows and/or Linux are your "backup server" and "clients" running? Second, how are you doing "transfer data between a disk backup set and a tape backup set"? Is it with a series of Transfer Snapshots script runs (pp. 210-217 of the Retrospect Windows 15 UG), or is it with a Transfer Backup Sets script run (pp. 206-210)? If it is with a series of Transfer Snapshots script runs, is there something special about when "the entire folder Bilder_1121'" should have been transferred? Or whether, with either type of Transfer, you have a a Selector that would have prevented the transfer? Please remember, in posting examples, that most people on these Forums don't understand German—so include some English interpretation.
  3. DavidHertzberg

    Execution Incomplete - how to fix

    addimoore, You misunderstand; "the June 13 update" does not have anything to do with a Microsoft Windows update, but with an updated version of Retrospect Windows. Since you say you are still running Retrospect Professional 7.7.620, you might try what hevanw reports worked for him/her here, which is "disabling the 'Save space and download files as you use them' setting" plus "disabling OneDrive altogether (Unlink PC/account and then remove the entire OneDrive folder) and then linking my account again which then again downloaded all files". If that doesn't work, you may have to take the financially-painful step of upgrading to Retrospect Windows 15—plus what MrMikeH reports doing here.
  4. DavidHertzberg

    Execution Incomplete - how to fix

    addimoore, There's a whole thread on this Forum related to a problem with the Windows April 2018 Update. This post, on page 4, may be a good starting point for your reading—forwards or backwards to this post. The "June 13 update" the page 4 post refers to is bug fix #7445 in Retrospect Windows 15.1.2.100, as mentioned at the top of these cumulative Release Notes.
  5. DavidHertzberg

    Replicate Onsite Backup to the Cloud

    kbisignani, You will probably want to look at this Knowledge Base article, for what it's worth. I did a Forums search, but there's nothing worth looking at except this answer I gave to an administrator who was having trouble restoring from Google Cloud Nearline—and I pointed him to the same KB article. P.S.: Ah, but there's always Wikipedia—specifically the last paragraph of this article section.
  6. DavidHertzberg

    Copying a retrospect hard disk backup

    capun, I just realized that you may be mentally back in the "oughties". You posted here in 2012 "I have Retrospect Pro 7.7"; has that changed? Also where can one find 4GB drives these days; do you instead mean 4TB drives? But what also just occurred to me is that you may be using File Backup Sets instead of Disk Backup Sets. Disk Backup Sets were introduced in Retrospect Windows 7.5; their advantages are described here on pages 37-38. But maybe Disk Backup Sets still had bugs in Retrospect Windows 7.7, which would explain why you might be still using File Backup Sets. As to "I haven't had good luck with drives over 4GB", I have a faint recollection that there used to be some size limitation on File Backup Sets. Here's a 2002 post that may shed some light on that, especially if you really means 4GB.
  7. DavidHertzberg

    ADMIN GUIDE: Hints for success with Disaster Recovery

    This is wonderful, Mr Pete! I strongly urge you to create a Support Case linking to your post above, suggesting as a Documentation product improvement that the post be turned into a Knowledge Base article. Here's why and how to do that. I suggest that your Support Case link to the post, rather than trying to copy the post as an "Additional" Note. That is for two reasons: [1] Retrospect Inc.'s Support Case software limits each Additional Note to about 2000 bytes, so you'd have to create a new Additional Note for each 15-20 lines. [2] The Support Case software has no capability for bolding, underlining, or italicizing text; when I write an Additional Note for a Support Case, I have to make do with underscore characters on each end of a word I want to emphasize. Again, thanks a lot!
  8. DavidHertzberg

    Cloud: no snapshot found

    insont/Martin, I mentioned 7 March 2018 because that's when I thought Retrospect 15 was announced (it was actually 6 March); x.0 major versions of Retrospect are generally announced in early March, with x.5 minor versions (which sometimes have added features) in early September. Wasabi support–you fast-Internet transAtlantic frugal person (insert appropriate smiley here; Wasabi only has datacenters in the U.S.)—was added in Retrospect Mac 14. Wasabi is supposed to be AWS-S3-compatible, but maybe there is an uncaught Retrospect bug related to using it. Please do us all a favor and file a Support case—here's why and how. Maybe you'll hear a great sound across the Atlantic, resulting from an engineer's slapping his/her forehead in Walnut Creek CA, by early September instead of early next year.
  9. DavidHertzberg

    Cloud: no snapshot found

    insont, You left out two very important pieces of information: What version of Retrospect Mac were you using last year through about 7 March of 2018, and what version are you using now? The bug might have been fixed in Retrospect 15, although there is no mention of it in the cumulative Release Notes. OTOH you might have been using Retrospect Mac 11.0 or older, since Retrospect Mac 11.5 fixed bug #5082. There is also the possibility that, since you are located in exotic Sweden, you had a non-ASCII character in your Wasabi cloud media set name, causing the problem fixed in bug #6096 for certain providers in Retrospect Mac 13.0.1.
  10. This post says "... machines running Mac OS 10.10; we have Client 6.3.029 running on them, and only certain folders are backed up, not the entire boot drive and operating system." However I forgot to mention that, if you want to upgrade to a newer-version Retrospect Server that will backup "clients" running the 6.3.029 Client, you've got until early March of next year to do it. After that this Knowledge Base announcement, , entitled "Support End-of-Life Announcement for Mac OS X 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5", will be in effect with Retrospect Mac 16.
  11. I have for several years been doing what it says in this old post, but now using the Desktop Edition of Retrospect Mac 14.6.0 on the Mac Pro "backup server"—which is running under macOS 10.12.6. In fact since yesterday I have been doing the same thing using a test-build of Retrospect Mac 15.1.1, supplied to me by Tech Support so that I can help pinpoint the -530 Bugs. One "client" is a MacBook Pro running the latest production Client (14.6.0 until yesterday, now 15.1.0). The other "client" is still a Digital Audio G4 running the 6.3.029 Client under OS X 10.3.9; as stated in the linked-to post, I have to change that Client's switch from Off to On. Once a week I also back up a an additional local drive on the Mac Pro that belonged to my late friend; I've left it as is with OSX 10.6—although I rarely boot from it, because my friend used a lot of PowerPC applications. As the head of Retrospect Tech Support states here, you shouldn't be using Client 6.3.029 to backup "clients" booting under anything past OS X 10.4. OTOH a year ago I did some older-version-of-application selective Restores on my Digital Audio G4, both to its OS X 10.3.9 boot drive and to one of the OS 9 drives also installed on that "client".
  12. DavidHertzberg

    Shut Down Computers Automatically

    Not any more there isn't. There was an option to shut down a client after completing a backup; that option is described on page 228 of the Retrospect Mac 14 User's Guide, in the "Legacy Client" appendix. However it is not shown in the screenshot on that page, and the description refers to the Special Menu, so I think it is only available if the Client is running on an OS 9 machine.
  13. DavidHertzberg

    No more instant scan on MacOS?

    suyashdruva says in the last 21 May 2018 post in that Apple Developer Forums thread "I observe case and normalization are preserved for operation other than delete. So why behavior is different for file/folder delete event? It seems while accumulating events, paths are getting normalized except this case." CrashPlan had (and evidently still has) a File System Scan that was scheduled to run by default at 3 a.m., because it "Requires more resources". CrashPlan used to use Spotlight instead of FSEvents—which Retrospect uses, so that section of the page used to say "Spotlight does not report deleted files in real-time, so CrashPlan only detects deleted files during the scheduled scan". Maybe Retrospect will have to adopt the same approach. P.S.: insont got in his immediately-preceding post while I was researching the second paragraph for this one. I think what I've just said still is applicable. P.P.S.: For the masochists and/or frustrated systems programmers among you, here's an applicable blog post—with comments—on APFS filename normalization.
  14. This over here is the new thread. Since it contains much more current information, let's use it.
  15. DavidHertzberg

    No more instant scan on MacOS?

    The OP in the 21 May Apple Developer Forums thread I linked to in this previous post used the "handle" "suyashdruva", so I just did a little Googling for "suyash druva". It appears that his name is Suyash Singh, and he works for a company named Druva. And a look at an overview video on Druva.com confirms they have product(s) that do AWS cloud backups including for "endpoints". Reading some of the references in this section of the Wikipedia "Backup" article has made me aware that "endpoint" is industry slang for end user devices such as PCs, laptops and mobile phones. And that would include Macs, so the APFS problem insont/martin reports sounds as if it's Mac-backup-industry-wide and not just limited to Retrospect. So "Walnut Creek, we have a problem"; sorry for my initial skepticism, Martin. BTW, even the newest of my 3 Macs is on macOS 10.12.6, and they use good old HFS+. So I'll let Instant Scan continue to shorten my daily incremental backups of one Mac by 8-10 minutes.
  16. DavidHertzberg

    No more instant scan on MacOS?

    insont/martin, I doubt your veracity because: [1] No other threads, other than the ones you have posted in, have reported a problem with APFS and Instant Scan for Retrospect Mac except for this one back in October 2017. [2] Retrospect Engineering has lately given fair warning about planned feature changes that would affect some administrators adversely; they put yellow-flagged Notes about two such changes (once of which has already been expanded into a Knowledge Base article) in the cumulative Release Notes for Retrospect Mac 15.1 (and one of those was already in there for Retrospect Mac 15.0)—so I find it a bit difficult to believe that Retrospect Engineering (which IME communicates with customers only through a Support Engineer) would announce such an adverse change directly to you. [2] is not impossible to believe; the next-to-last substantive paragraph in this post suggests that IMHO the "real" engineers are being given unprecedented freedom in documentation. Also, the Apple Developer Forums thread linked to in my preceding post indicates there is a problem with the APFS change in "normalization" of file names. Finally, this would be such a massively adverse change that Retrospect Product Management may have "chickened out" on announcing it, which would explain why you "had a week-long exchange with Retrospect support" and why this Knowledge Base article has not been updated. As a mere customer, I am not allowed to view Support Cases other than my own. However I will file a Support Case, referencing this thread and Support Case 61949—which Retrospect Support has the capability of viewing.
  17. DavidHertzberg

    No more instant scan on MacOS?

    insont, The only 2018 information I could find about this is this thread on the Apple Developer Forums. Forgive me for asking this, but I notice your profile contains no information about you, that you joined the Forums on 30 June, and that your profile says "The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users." Is what you are saying you heard from Retrospect Engineering true, or is it "fake news".
  18. If you're on Retrospect 15.1, you may still be entitled to free personalized Retrospect Technical Support. Here is why and how to file a Support Case. If you are in the U.S. or Canada, I would also suggest making a phone call to R.T.S. at (888) 376-1078 or (925) 476-1030 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Pacific Time. If you are in Europe (I can't tell; please update your Profile with at least your country of location), from what I've seen on these Forums it sounds as if the phone support there is not very knowledgeable.
  19. What version of Retrospect Mac are you using? If it's later than Retrospect Mac 12, Fast Catalog Rebuild has been removed—see the first paragraph of this post (and mentally substitute Retrospect Mac 13 whenever you read Retrospect Windows 11 and Retrospect Mac 14 whenever you read Retrospect Windows 12). If you're still using Retrospect Mac 12 or earlier, you might be able to get out of the problem by upgrading—although you can't run recent versions of Retrospect Mac on a PowerPC Mac (which you may be using if you're talking about tapes). If you can upgrade and still mount a compatible tape drive, I would suggest deleting the Media Set and its catalog, creating a new one with the same name, and adding the tapes as members. Actually even if you can't upgrade, I would suggest doing the same thing.
  20. The reason Pete asked bobagentur those questions seems to have had something to do with this post, although it came earlier than speleo14's thread.
  21. DavidHertzberg

    More granular control over email notifications

    LRSFC_DanJ, Glad to see a version of the script hook script you need is already written, so you don't need to go to the lengths I suggested here. Interesting to see that, according to the copyright date, it was written in 2012. This confirms what I had previously learned; script hook scripts, which were announced as a new feature of Retrospect Windows 12, already existed. Maybe they were just new for Retrospect Mac 14, although they didn't work there for Windows Clients until saskia got that fixed over six months later. However, in the "Example scripts" section of this Knowledge Base article, there is a script listed as email notifier Windows specific batch file to illustrate emailing each event. (Old) I just downloaded the .ZIP file linked to at the top of the "Example scripts" section of that article, and the applicable script in it appears to be identical—except for the line-starting plus signs—to what you linked to. That would imply that the script is a Windows batch file, written in a language even more loathsome (looks longingly at old C++ books on shelf)—but more widely known by IT people—than VBA. Could you come up with a combination of checkboxes that would satisfy all administrators, or would individual adaptions of a script be easier?
  22. DavidHertzberg

    More granular control over email notifications

    LRSFC_DanJ, I just remembered that, back in September 2016, I demonstrated that Wake-On-LAN didn't work for scheduled scripts doing Backup of my MacBook Pro—and this was confirmed as a bug by Retrospect Tech Support. I don't use Proactive scripts, so I asked in the immediately-preceding post whether the bug also existed for Proactive scripts. I never got an answer in that thread or the thread that post linked to. The cumulative Retrospect Windows Release Notes have the following entries for 15.1: "Windows Client: Fixed Wake-On-Lan (WOL) for upgraded Windows client (#7358)". "Mac Client: Fixed issue where client did not prevent macOS from going to sleep during backup (#7273)". They also have the following entry for 15.0: "Changed defaults for "Wake-on-LAN" option: disabled for proactive backup and enabled for other scripts (#7237)". Since you're running Retrospect Windows 15.1, you might want to make sure you've updated your Client software on all your Mac and Windows "client" machines to make sure your Mac "clients" are not inadvertently going to sleep during Proactive backups. If your users are intentionally putting Mac "clients" to sleep during Proactive backups, I suggest the Post-it note approach quoted at the beginning of this post. I also suggest that you talk to Tech Support, to find out exactly what the Wake-On-LAN situation is for Clients. BTW I don't see any way any application's "backup server" could wake up a "client" that has been actually powered off, but then I only had high-school physics. Maybe Chinese Intelligence can do it for ZTE cell phones; I bought one about a month ago, so should I be worried?
  23. DavidHertzberg

    PSA: Wikipedia article on Retrospect going away in current form

    The 90-day average of views (article->View History->Page view statistics->Options: Latest 90) of the Wikipedia "Retrospect (software)" article is 25. That's around 20 people viewing it on ordinary days, supplemented by another 15-25 people viewing it on days when there has just been an update. I suspect that most of the extra 15-25 people work in Walnut Creek CA, but the 20 "others" represent potential buyers of the software. Those "others" are the people for whom DovidBenAvraham expanded the article in October 2016. The Wikipedia community is trying to improve the trustworthiness of information in articles. Let's look at the "Backup" article as an example. Having appended a new 2-screen-page section with about 50 discrete references (some used several times), DBA turned his attention on 10 April 2018 to the preceding 7 screen pages of the article—which at that time had 18 references. The preceding pages had not received substantial updates since 2011, and basically represented "community folklore" as of about 2007. The last sentence of the "Hard disk" paragraph in the "Storage media" sub-section said "The main disadvantages of hard disk backups are that they are easily damaged, especially while being transported (e.g., for off-site backups), and that their stability over periods of years is a relative unknown." DBA and I felt that the first part of the sentence was out-of-date for modern portable HDDs, which now have ramp loading and built-in accelerometers. DBA found a manufacturer statement which supported our view, but could not find it again. Meanwhile WP editor JohnInDC found a The Wirecutter 2017 review that covered "rugged" portable HDDs; it seemed to support the old view, but DBA pointed out on the WP article's Talk page that—when read carefully—the review said that the tested drives were fairly shock-resistant although not as shock-resistant as the manufacturers claimed. On 9 June DBA inserted a reference to a YouTube video of an experiment by the German "Timo", which seemed to be a fairly careful limited test of shaking and banging a not-in-a-computer internal Seagate HDD USB-connected to a computer measuring InputOutputs/sec.. JohnInDC rejected the reference, commenting "YouTube is not a Reliable Source". DBA replied on the WP article's Talk page that the warnings about YouTube in the Wikipedia rules referred to copyright violations and one-sided narrator statements, and were not applicable to videos of carefully-conducted experiments—which in his opinion do not include a 2009 mail.ru video of a black-clad demonstrator tossing an un-cabled Samsung portable HDD high over his shoulder and off a wall accompanied by a penny-whistle rendition of the "Imperial March" from "The Empire Strikes Back". There being no response from JohnInDC over the next week, DBA put back in the reference to the "Timo" video. At the same time he deleted the reference to the Wirecutter review, because its 2018 revision has deleted the supporting sentences DBA had quoted. DBA also added a reference to a Toshiba Singapore advertisement he had at last found, which mentioned the ramp loading and accelerometer features of a particular 2018 portable drive model. The preceding two paragraphs describe the current vetting of a technical Wikipedia article. In it DBA represents the ambitious contributor, and JohnInDC represents another editor determined to ensure the accuracy of the contribution. It is worth noting that the updated first 7 screen-pages of the current "Backup" article now have 48 references; DBA's efforts on those pages seem to have encouraged the WP editor Lostraven to add references, many of which are to printed books and journals that Lostraven found on books.google.com. P.S.: JohnInDC deleted the reference to the "Timo" experiment again on the grounds of experimenter "non-reliability". DBA investigated a further "Timo" experiment that destroyed a not-in-a-computer internal hard drive with a hammer, and decided that the first "Timo" experiment was not powerful enough to be worth fighting for. However DBA found a 2007 HGST whitepaper that really justified the improvement in portable drive reliability, and pruned quotes in a reference to it of "buying advice" that JohnInDC objected to. All part of the modern Wikipedia article vetting process, folks.
  24. Some other Wikipedia editors complained that "the article contains excessive detail, it's written more like an essay or exposition than an cut-and-dried encyclopedia article, and the sourcing doesn't really support a lot of the inferences and asides". DovidBenAvraham took care of the inferences and asides by essentially eliminating the "Documentation" section; it made inferences (most of which are now preserved in this Mac Forum post) mostly by comparing current versions of Retrospect Mac User's Guides to past versions of the same UGs, to the same versions of the Retrospect Windows UGs, to buttons in the Retrospect Mac GUI, or to the Tutorials or Knowledge Base articles. Those comparisons by editors are considered un-sourced "original research" in the Wikipedia world, but it's OK for an editor to report on such comparisons if they were made by a third-party reviewer. However these other editors are now strong-arming DovidBenAvraham to rewrite the rest of the article, under the threat of doing it themselves if he doesn't. That rewriting will be done over the next few days. When it's complete and has passed muster with the complaining editors, I'll go through the posts on these forums and revise them so that they link to the new appropriate sections in the article. Here's a permanent link to the article in its old form.
  25. DavidHertzberg

    PSA: Wikipedia article on Retrospect going away in current form

    If you read my complete post, you'll see my explanation. Good morning to you, but I'm going to bed.
×