Jump to content

jhg

Members
  • Content count

    133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by jhg

  1. jhg

    Retrospect's Future?

    The list of devices in Hardware Compatibility is getting seriously long in the tooth. Many of the devices listed there are no longer manufactured, and EMC/Dantz doesn't seem to be adding any new DVD hardware. At the least they aren't keeping up with the plethora of new devices available. Just as a single example, look at the Sony DRU810. This has been available now for almost a year, and is one of the more popular devices (along with similar dual-format dual-layer drives from the likes of Pioneer, Memores, Plextor, et al). The latest Sony drive in the same class that's even listed is the DRU700. As regular readers of this forum know, it is NOT the case that support for a previous model indicates support for its replacement (past performance is no guarantee....) Since EMC bought Dantz my general impression is that development work on Retrospect has slowed or even stopped, which would be a real shame since Retrospect is still the only backup I'm aware of system that maintains snapshots. Not even the high-priced enterprise products will do that, as we painfully found out with Legato last week at work. Anyone know what's going on, and whether we should expect Retrospect to be around much longer? Anyone from EMC care to comment? My real fear is that EMC will just let Retrospect atrophy and die a slow, painful death, as it represents competition for all the other products they've acquired recently. I'd LOVE for someone from EMC to tell me I'm wrong and give us all some idea of where Retrospect is headed in the future.
  2. jhg

    Retrospect's Future?

    Quote: Hi ... Pioneer Pioneer DVR-110D ... Nate On Pioneer's website this drive looks to be identical with the DVR-R100 except that the 110D is the OEM version and the R100 comes with software in a retail package. Is the DVR-R100 supported also?
  3. jhg

    Retrospect's Future?

    Quote: Hi ... NEC ND-3550A CD/DVD Drive ... Nate Model ND-3550 isn't listed at all on NEC's website. There are listings for ND3500, 3520 and 3540. Are these all the same drive and supported by Retrospect?
  4. jhg

    Retrospect's Future?

    Quote: Hey, JHG I wouldn't consider a Sony drive in any circumstance, much less when it's going to be used in a backup environment. It's not that I'm dogging Sony in particular. But when you can buy something like Plextor, why get a Sony or an HP drive? Plextor drives are simply the best, and they don't cost much more than their alternatives. I tend to agree about Sony drives, but I've been researching Plextor and am put off by the large number of negative posts to review sites complaining about how the 716A lasts only 3-6 months under even moderate use (10hr/month). The drive gets rave reviews for performance, but doesn't seem to stand up to usage at all. Here are a couple of sample quotes from newegg.com's customer reviews: Quote: Comments: My first Plextor died after 7 months. I RMAed it to Plextor and they sent me a new replacement. That one died after 6 months! A friend of mine had to RMA his Plextor after 8 months and the new replacement now needs to be RMAed after 2 weeks! AVOID Plextor like the PLAGUE! and Quote: Comments: I have had nothing but problems with this drive, I am on my 3rd drive now, and still nothing but problems. I also purchased my first drive on 03/2005 manufactured 02/2005, I am starting to think maybe they had some manufacturing issues during this time. 1st drive died after 3 months, 2nd drive gets read errors 90% of the time, 3rd drive Dead on arrival. and Quote: Comments: Add me to the list of people who have had trouble with this drive. This is the first DVD writer that I've ever had that can't read the disks that it writes. Reading CDs is hit or miss as well. I could have bought 3 Lite-ons for what this drive cost, and Lite-on has never given me any trouble. I guess I'll look at the NEC drives
  5. jhg

    Retrospect's Future?

    It would be nice to have some guidance on the newer drives. I need to buy a new DVD writer and am considering several current models by different manufacturers, none of which are listed in the device compatibility list. I'm loath to spend the money only to find out that the one I choose cannot be made to work with Retrospect. Which dual-layer device/brand has the highest chance of working with auto configuration?
  6. I'm trying to custom-configure a DVD8631 with DVD+R media in R7 Disk-to-Disk. When I insert the media and close the tray, Retrospect ejects it after about 5 seconds and pops up the media request dialog again. It doesn't seem to recognize the media. I have the latest driver update and installer versions. The media is Memorex DVD+R (8x compatible). Suggestions?
  7. jhg

    Media Unrecognized

    Under very specific circumstances, R7 refuses to recognize valid media in a DVD+RW backup set. Those conditions are: 1) DVD media has been reformatted 2) Retrospect is auto-launched I'm using a fully-verified drive (Sony DRU-510A) and Memorex media. I have a nightly incremental backup scheduled for 2:00 AM. When I login in the morning, Retrospect is still up with the Device Manager window open showing "Media Unrecognized". All I have to do to get past this condition is eject and reinsert the media. At that point Retrospect proceeds without error. I recently extended an existing backup set with new DVDs -- the problem went away as long as the incremental job was writing to the new media. Then I rotated to the next backup set, and the problem started happening again. This does not normally happen when R7 has been manually started, although I have seen it once or twice then also. I've had an open support case on this problem for 6 months but nobody at Dantz seems interested in pursuing it.
  8. jhg

    Philips DVD+-RW 8631 doesn't quite work

    Same here. I have a support case open (6 months now) with no apparent action by Dantz. My problem occurs on a Sony DRU510A, and I just discovered that the problem occurs only on +RW media that is being reused. I rotate through 8 backup sets, each of which has 6 DVD members. When I fill up 6 members I move to the next backup set. Recently I found myself short of time and extended a backup set to 8 DVDs. For the entire time I was writing incremental sessions to those 2 never-before-used DVDs I did not get "Unrecognized media". I finally rotated to the next backup set, and the first autorun incremental stopped with "Unrecognized media". I also see this only on autorun backups, not when starting manually, and can get past the error merely by ejecting and reinserting the disk. However, this defeats the purpose of scheduled backups, which is to run unattended.
  9. I've been having "Unrecognized Media" problems with my Sony DRU510A for 6 months now. I've had a support case open for that long, but nothing ever seems to happen, even though I ping the support guy every couple of weeks. I get the feeling nobody's really trying to solve the problem. I did just discover that the problem only happens when reusing media. When writing to new media I don't get "Unrecognized media". I rotate through 8 backup sets, each of which has 6 DVD members. When I fill up 6 members I move to the next backup set. Recently I found myself short of time and extended a backup set to 8 DVDs. For the entire time I was writing incremental sessions to those 2 never-before-used DVDs I did not get "Unrecognized media". I finally rotated to the next backup set, and the first autorun incremental stopped with "Unrecognized media". FWIW, all I have to do is eject and reinsert the DVD for it to work. I have a feeling this is a problem specific to Sony drives with reformatted media, but that's a recipe for finger-pointing exercises if nobody at Dantz wants to follow up on this.
  10. I've read other threads where Dantz denies the usefulness of a true verify function -- one where the backup contents are compared to the original files. While I agree that a verify-only function is of limited use for backup sets, it is CRITICAL for archive sets. Backup media is reused and recycled on a regular basis, and when errors are discovered it is discarded. Archive sets are intended to be permanent, and it is extremely important that one be able to verify their integrity on a regular basis. Also, in some cases, it would be expedient to verify that the hard disk files match the archive contents. Case in point: as a photographer working primarily in digital form, I have accumulated about 40GB of image data. I recently went through a painful exercise setting up a RAID-1 array (that's another story, another forum) and there's some lingering doubt about whether or not the photo directories were corrupted. What I want to do is compare the Retrospect archive media with the image files on disk to see if there are any differences. Without a true verify function (one that compares the file contents) this is difficult. I will have to restore the entire 8 DVDs to disk and do the comparison there.
  11. Between 6.5 and 7 Retrospect has gone from a product that "just works" to one that requires constant handholding and tweaking. I have had to deal with problems including: 1) "Media Unrecognized" on a DVD drive that worked perfectly with 6.5 -- the workaround is to open and close the drive manually 2) Unable to even install the server version on Win2003 3) Unable to find clients where previously there was no difficulty finding them 4) Consistent inability to use file-based backup sets because the RBF file gets corrupted (at least that's what Retrospect is telling me) 5) Attempts to repair the damaged catalog result in Retrospect hanging, accumulating almost no CPU usage or increasing memory usage but page fault rates of 2000-4000 per SECOND.
  12. jhg

    Is EMC trying to kill Retrospect?

    My original post was censored by Mayoff. Part of what he removed pointed out that EMC has bought several backup software companies. In the past, this type of consolidation has led to only one package surviving and the rest being discontinued. For example, take ScanSoft's purchase of Xerox Pagis and Textbridge. They also bought PaperPort and Caere, competing products, and then proceeded to kill Pagis and Textbridge. From a management perspective that doesn't appreciate how unique Retrospect is, it would make sense to whittle the offerings down to one product to reduce development and support costs. For loyal Retrospect users, such as myself, it would be a disaster because there just isn't anything else on the market that provides equivalent functionality. The fact that Mayoff censored my original post (let's see what happens to this one) only supports my contention.
  13. jhg

    Is EMC trying to kill Retrospect?

    I respectfully request that you reinstate my original posting the way I wrote it. Thanks.
  14. jhg

    Is EMC trying to kill Retrospect?

    I notice you censored my original post. Why?
  15. jhg

    Is EMC trying to kill Retrospect?

    That isn't the point of my posting. I have contacted technical support with extremely poor results. The response to being unable to install on 2003 was ascribed to InstallShield and tech support basically said "Sorry, not our problem". I also have an open ticket on the Media Unrecognized issue, but so far there is no solution. Based on the problems being reported in this forum, it's clear that the quality of the implementation has completely tanked (as opposed to the quality of the architecture and design, which is still excellent) with the release of v7. On the recatalog issue, I just let it run and it finally completed after several hours. During that time the GUI was COMPLETELY unresponsive, and I was unable to even minimize the window. This is NOT the way it's supposed to work. The corruption issue happens when backing up across the network. It occurs in both the following situations: 1) Full Retrospect running on the machine to be backed up, writing backup set to a file on a server network drive. 2) Retrospect running on the server using the Retrospect client on the machine to be backed up. Another problem: A specific file was causing the backup to hang. Tech support's response was "that can't happen", even after I invested several hours performing detailed tests to demonstrate that it was the file contents, not its location on disk, that was the problem. Once again, tech support shrugs their collective shoulders and says "don't back up that file". This is not the quality of software or tech support I've come to expect from Dantz.
  16. My most recent post was about losing connectivity to a client, and my solution. Reading the other recent posts here I see sevaral people having similar problems. One interresting facet of my problem was that when in discovery mode Retrospect was sending UDP packets over one interface (the 'real' ethernet card) using the source address of a different interface (the SonicWall virtual VPN adapter). This happened when there was a pre-existing client defined i.e. Retrospect had a valid client IP address, so the destination was correct, but the source address on the discovery packets was wrong. This was causing the client response packets to be ignored by the machine running Retrospect. After deleting the client definition and relying only on Piton discovery, Retrospect was sending discovery packets only on the first interface, which was the wrong one. Is it possible 6.5 has a bug in client discovery with multiple adapters? From the symptoms, this bug would have two parts: a) Piton discovery is happening only on the first adapter. Since most machines are likely to have mutilple virtual adapters (ethernet, dialup, VPN) even if there is only one real network, this might be a serious problem. If you have a defined client and for some reason your adapter bindings get shuffled (define new dialup connection, add VPN software, etc), then Piton discovery packets may go out on the right interface but with the wrong source IP, or on the wrong interface. Sounds like Retrospect needs an option to unambiguously choose which interfaces to scan for clients. If support for multiple interfaces is considered an advanced option (i.e. more $$) then us basic users at least need a way to pick one interface without relying on the Windows binding order, and then have Retrospect use that interface with the correct source IP. Comments?
  17. Server Retrospect Professional 7.0.265 with latest update, running on XP SP2 with all current updates. Client is XP SP2 with latest client Backup to file starts OK, proceeds for about 2 GB and then quits with -519 error. Second volume on client skipped due to -519. Restaring the backup script manually in the same Retrospect session also fails with -519 Closing and restarting Retrospect (without touching the client machine) seems to fix the problem -- at least it now says it's scanning. I'm going to bed and will post more info tomorrow.
  18. jhg

    Several gripes

    Quote: It may sound like "party line" but I can assure you that if the network and network hardware are reliable Retrospect client will work well. This is true even if the throughput of the network is slow. -519 is certainly "overloaded" (see my related thread) I heartily second the motion that Dantz needs to recognize and admit it has problems, especially with the 7.0 release. I've been a loyal user of Retrospect since its early Mac days, and am extremely concerned with the decline in quality of each successive release. I currently have egg on my face for recommending to my company that they purchase Retrospect Multi-Server. We can't even get it installed on Win2003 and all Dantz tech support can say is "well, it's a problem with InstallShield - we can't do anything about it".
  19. The firewall is totally disabled. Neither the windows service nor the GUI are running. I thought I was pretty clear in my last post that I can alternate between success and failure at will just by changing the contents of the file. It's obvious to me that -519 just means "Server lost contact with client". Whether this is due to a true network problem or just a client failure is probably not communicated. You say Retrospect doesn't look inside the files, but at some point it must read the data and store it in buffers. My guess is something in the file is causing the client to fail completely and stop sending data, which is interpreted by the server as a communications failure. Since Retrospect has the option of doing a byte-by-byte comparison (I don't have that turned on), then the client must be capable of examining the contents. I think that is where the error will be found.
  20. Backing up a client XPSP2 with R7Pro on XPSP2. Get: Can't use Open File Backup option for SYSTEM (C:) on [remote host name], error -3043 (the maximum number of Snapshots has been reached) The backup set is a file backup and has only three snapshots in it. Obviously the error message is bogus. Anyone know what the real problem is?
  21. I tried the backup several times and noticed that each time it hung on a specific file, called "backdoor.rlk", which is an IDS signature file for Kerio Personal Firewall. There appear to be three variables here for further experimentation: The file's name its contents its location or any combination of these three. Applying the scientific method, I tried the following experiments: Test 1 Disable the firewall (but leave the service running) Result: Same - hangs at backdoor.rlk and eventually fails with -519 error. Test 2: Disable the firewall service completely Result: Same Test 3: Put the entire IDS signature directory into a ZIP file and delete the signature directory. Result: Backup completes successfully Test 4: Restore the IDS signature directory from the ZIP but delete backdoor.rlk Result: Backup completes successfully Test 5: Create a dummy "backdoor.rlk" file in C:\, containing the single word "test" Result: Backup completes successfully Test 6: Create a dummy "backdoor.rlk" file in the Kerio IDS signature directory. Result: Backup completes successfully Test 7: Restore the original "backdoor.rlk" file from the ZIP into the Kerio IDS signature directory Result: Hangs at backdoor.rlk and fails with -519 error Test 8: Move backdoor.rlk to C:\ Result: Hangs and fails with -519 error This pretty clearly indicates that the contents of the file, not its name or location, are to blame. Note that all the above tests were executed without rebooting, so the firewall service remains completely disabled. Next I tried: Test 9: Delete last line of backdoor.rlk and save (still in C:\) Result: Hangs and fails with -519 Test 10: Delete all but the first line of backdoor.rlk Result: Backup completes successfully Test 11: Restore backdoor.rlk from ZIP and delete last half of the file (lines 57-112) Result: Backup completes successfully Test 12: Restore backdoor.rlk from ZIP and delete first half of the file (lines 1-56) Result: Hangs and fails with -519 AHA! We're on to something. Since the whole file is 112 lines, a binary search should take only 6 more tests. Test 13: Keep lines 1-28 of the file Result: Successful backup Test 14: Restore backdoor.rlk from ZIP and delete all but lines 29-56 (OK, it's not quite a binary search since I have to verify failure on the other half of the range after a success) Result: Successful backup (!?) Hmmm... lines 1-56 will cause Retrospect to fail, but 1-28 and 29-56 individually will not. I should reverify that the file still causes the backup to fail. Test 15: Restore backdoor.rlk from ZIP Result: Hangs and fails with -519 Would anyone at Dantz care to take this up?
  22. I backup my laptop to a file on my desktop system. Sometime in the last month it has become impossible to do a normal backup to an existing file backup set. The sequence of events is as follows (all operations are run manually) 1) Create a new backup set on a network path, specifying the destination as a UNC path (\\host\share). This works fine and creates the backup (about 3GB). 2) Attempt to run a normal (i.e. incremental) backup. The first time I try this it fails with -1017 Insufficient permissions. 3) Subsequent attempts to run a normal backup or even open the backupset properties give a different error: The catalog file is damaged and cannot be used HOWEVER, examining the file modification date/time shows that the file has not been modified since it was created. What's going on? System Info: Dell Latitude C840 Win XP Pro SP2 with all current patches 512MB memory Desktop (backup destination): Win XP Pro SP2 with all current patches
  23. 7.0 (time-limited trial key) installed on Win2003 server 2 days ago. Tried to install 7.0.265 update, get: 1607: Unable to install InstallShield scripting runtime I am logged on to a domain account that has local admin privileges <editorial> I'm appalled at the quality of this release, as shown by the egregious bugs fixed in the update so quick on the heels of the original release. Come on Dantz... or has being taken over by EMC demolished everyone's morale...? </editorial>
  24. Just upgraded from R6.5 pro to R7 Pro. I have a normal backup to DVD scheduled every night that has been running flawlessly. Now (since upgrading) every morning I see Retrospect waiting for media. It says the DVD in the drive is unrecognized. All I have to do is open and close the drive and it recognizes the media and proceeds with the backup. The drive is a Sony DRU-510A (internal), and has always worked flawlessly with R6.5.
  25. jhg

    Port Enablement: Can't See Client

    Try this: Configure/Clients Add.. Click the "Test" button and enter the IP address of the client and click OK If this is successful it's an indication that the multicast ("Piton") protocol used by Retrospect isn't making it from server to client. If this test is unsuccessful, then it's time to debug basic network connectivity and firewall. Can you ping the server from the client and vice versa?
×