Jump to content

rodlord

Members
  • Content count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About rodlord

  • Rank
    Occasional Forum Poster
  1. Just accepted the offer to update to 11.5.3 and am now regreting it. Launching the application never comes out of "connecting ..." which I discover is because Retrospect Engine will not start. Doing this manually from within the Mountain Lion System Preferences does absolutely nothing. Button lights up blue, accepts the click to start the engine ... nothing happens. Have re-started the system but no improvement. Any ideas how I get past this please ? Thanks Rod
  2. I found the Retrospect settings in preferences after posting my last message but thank you both for your help.
  3. Yes, thanks Lennart. I kind of get the idea, but these 2 background processes are chuntering away ALL the time, even if there is no job going on. I don't use scripts etc, I just fire up Retrospect when I want it to actually do something. Is there a way of telling the background processes to mind their own business when the Application is not active ? This was never a problem with the earlier version I was using on my old G4. cheers Rod
  4. Hi RetroEngine and RetroISA seem to be constantly using up LARGE amounts of CPU and RAM percentage. How can I force these to stop interfering when Retrospect is not launched ? Is it possible to set it so that they are only active when the application itself is launched ? cheers Rod
  5. Hi I just purchased an upgrade to version 11 from 10.1.0. Although the installation process went through OK while I watched and a success was reported my Retrospect version is still 10.1.0. Is there something I need to do to actually get to use the version I've just paid for ? Thanks in hope ! cheers Rod
  6. OK - thanks Robin. I suppose I will just keep one of the old Mac minis to access this data if it is ever needed.
  7. It's such an obvious need that when you are forced to upgrade your backup software that it should be able to read it's own catalogues from previous versions. When I discovered that version 10 was unable to do this I couldn't quite get my head around it but as I had no time available to "REBUILD" from the media I kept my old G5 going just to access the archives. I had taken it for granted that it was only a matter of time before Retrospect finally got round to providing a file converter that could read ver 6 (or any other previous version) catalogues and write them out as ver 10 ones. I'm not talking about tapes and tape drives here - I'm referring to removable external Firewire hard drives. Surely this is a completely different kettle of fish and there really should be no problem to do just such an app - if you're Dantz. Can anyone tell me if there is such a beast yet ? - or if there is any intention to do one ? I really do hope so because I still can't get my head around how really naff this is. It would take days ... and days ... to rebuild 4 catalogues, each containing 5 hard drives, from the media. The tedious repetitive changing of 20 hard drives would make you bonkers. Thanking you hopefully ... Rod
  8. Have been running Retrospect 6 on OSX 10.3.9 for a long time using external Firewire drives as the back-up media. All Lacie drives below 1 Tb capacity. Just came to the end of disk 6 in one set and Retrospect is asking for a new empty drive to be number 7. So I've mounted a brand new 1.8 Tb Lacie formatted as Mac OS extended with nothing on it. Retrospect tries to start using it but keeps coming back with an error 209 Media Content Damaged message. Have erased several times but no joy. I have a second brand new empty 1.8 Tb Lacie and have tried that one as well, with the same results. I've never encountered this problem before and can find no info on it. Does anyone know if this could be due to some sort of limit on the capacity of the disk drive ? Thanks in hope ! Rod
  9. In case anyone else has been getting this problem it seems to have been sorted as follows : I remembered that in the distant past DAT drives needed to be either first or last on the SCSI chain - and in some cases at a very particular location in 3D space ! My Retro 4 preferred to have the DAT first in the chain. I thought I'd try a bit of SCSI Voodoo and see what happened moving the DAT to last in the chain. It seems that retro 5 likes this better - it works - at least for the moment ...!! Voodoo... ...Who do ?... ...we all do... ...
  10. Hi Recently upgraded to 5 on a G4 450 OS 9.2.2 backing up to a LACIE DAT-STOL-DDS5GB. 1 ---- If the backup to DAT includes one or more large movie files (1 Gb +) it is prone to getting so far and then apparently sitting at the same spot ad infinitum. The turning cursor continues, but nothing seems to be happening. No errors reported. Apparently no disc problems or tape problems because collections of smaller files (hundreds of Mb) on the same discs and to the same tape go through fine. I have tried leaving it in this state for hours, but it never comes out. If I click STOP it asks "really ?", then says it's stopping, but never comes out of that either. Only way to get out of these situations is to force quit, restart, and repair the catalogue. On one or two occasions it has frozen the Mac. I can normally predict when this is likely to happen - if the performance figure is somewhere between 40 Mb/min and 60 Mb/min it's usually a good sign - if it's in excess of 70 Mb/min I can expect things to grind to a halt at some point. On occasion it has started off with a performance figure of 90 to 100 Mb/min ! - which is pretty impressive for DAT - but sadly doesn't come through. I've tried allocating various amounts of RAM to retro 5 from the way it comes to 100 megs. Doesn't seem to make a scrap of difference. 2 -------- When restoring a single text file of 3k it spent 15 minutes doing a sort of "rewind-fast forward-rewind" cycle before finally succeeding. It does something similar when retrieving loads of individual image files of about 1 Mb each. Doing one of these "whirry" cycles for each file. Took AGES. But it doesn't ALWAYS happen. On the same tape it will suddenly stop happening and performance will soar from 5 Mb/min to 50 or better and everything smooths out for a while. Sounds suspiciously like dirty heads but I use a cleaner tape regularly and the heads aren't very old - been in use for only a couple of months. Has anyone got any suggestions please ? The first prob with large movie files is the most pressing as it seems impossible to back them up. I can live with the other if I have to. I'm living in hopeful anticipation !
×