IanWorthington Posted May 26, 2002 Report Share Posted May 26, 2002 Running a backup to CD I got a -206 error (read problems) on the compare. I ran a verify on the dataset and one of the disks reports the same error -- though now 5 times rather than just once. The verify reports that a small number of files were not verified. What is the best approach to handling this sort of error? Does Retsrospect "know" it hasn't got a good backup of these files in this save set, or if not, is there any way of telling it? Do I need to delete the entire save set and start again or what? Any words of wisdom would be much appreciated! Ian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted May 28, 2002 Report Share Posted May 28, 2002 I would set this one member as missing and continue with another piece. That isn't a solid backup on that once piece of media. Configure/Backupsets then get properties on the backupset and go to the members tab. From there set the member as missing. (the one that got the error). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted May 28, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2002 Hmmm.... I'm not quite as happy with this reponse than the other! :-) This would mean losing access to the history of changes recorded on this CD, and thus the ability to rollback to any particular version, as well the need to rebackup (is that a real word?) all the files on that disk. What are my alternatives? Could I, for instance, rebuild the catalog? Would this detect that some files don't have good backups whilst keeping my history available and not increasing my collection of CD coasters? (Thanks for your speedy response though!) Ian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted May 28, 2002 Report Share Posted May 28, 2002 >>This would mean losing access to the history of changes recorded on this CD, and thus the ability to rollback to any particular version, as well the need to rebackup (is that a real word?) all the files on that disk. << When you set a member as missing, it marks the files that were on that member as "needing to be backed up again"..... The downfall is, you could continue to backup on that cd after an error 206 (or like wise) and then you wouldn't be able to restore later. Either way your without the backup material on that member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted May 31, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2002 >> When you set a member as missing, it marks the files that were on that member as "needing to be backed up again"..... The downfall is, you could continue to backup on that cd after an error 206 (or like wise) and then you wouldn't be able to restore later. Either way your without the backup material on that member. I won't be able to restore later? Or I won't be able to restore the members that couldn't be verified? In this case there are 3 members on the disk that can't be verified. It would be nice (big hint) if Retrospect could simply add them to its list of stuff that needs to backup next time around... Ian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted May 31, 2002 Report Share Posted May 31, 2002 You will not be able to restore members that couldn't be verified if the verification failed with a 206. Anything that gets an error on Verificiation....will be marked for to be backed up next time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted June 2, 2002 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2002 Melissa -- Excuse me, but I'm confused. On the one hand you seem to be saying I should mark the CD members with files that failed verification as missing, but on the other hand you say that Retropect will backup next time around anything that failed verification. Could you please clarify for me: 1. Under what circumstances it would be better to set the member as missing? 2. Under what circumstances will Retrospect cope with problems and backup stuff "next time around"? Thanks for your patience with me here... Ian ... ps. An afterthought... 3. Is there anyway I can track the activity on a given file through all of the backups? If I know that something.txt failed verification on a certain date how can I check what copies of that file exist, and what I've got access to to restore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheetah Posted June 3, 2002 Report Share Posted June 3, 2002 I have had the same errors also. Something I've discovered which I can't explain yet is that it seems to do with the speed you write at. My drive is a 24/10/40. When I did a backup at 24x I was getting the -206 errors, even though the disc seemed to write OK. But, when I switched to using 16x discs, my backups and verifies worked perfectly. Now, I yesterday I tried to do a backup using 10x RW discs, which is the max RW speed for my drive. I hit the exact same errors again. I will next try to do it with slower rated RW discs and see if that fixes the problem. In the meantime, you could try to do a back up with discs that are slower rated than your drive's top write speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted June 3, 2002 Report Share Posted June 3, 2002 1) & 2) if you get an error 206 or 102, you should set the member missing. It will rebackup those files that were on the missing member, provided they are still on your system, next time around. If you get a "modified date and time" compare error, then you should NOT set the member missing and just continue as normal. It will rebackup those files that get the error next time around. 3) If you setup a "blank restore" you will be able to can view all files (including different versions) that are in this backup set. Here is how to do that: Please go to Immediate > Restore, and select Search for Files and Folders, and then proceed to select your Backup Set. Click OK. In the Destination selection window, select the destination drive and Retrieve Files & Folders from the pop-up window. Click OK. Leave the criteria field blank, and click OK. In the confirmation window, click the Files Chosen button. This will build a browser window containing everything in your Backup Set. Navigate to the files that you want to see or restore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted June 3, 2002 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2002 Cheetah -- CDRs are very temperamental and high-maintanence creatures. What brand/type works well in one manufacturers drive doesn't at another. Ditto for speed. (See the Adaptec/Roxio? forum for reams of stuff on this subject). And the Retrospect implementation of packet writing seems more sensitive to phases of the moon and state of the tides than some others. Or maybe its just better at reporting errors. I'm not sure... When you swtiched from a 24x disc to a 16x disk to a 10x disc you almost certainly changed much more than just the write speed, so it isn't really a valid test... What would be interesting to do though and maybe *** MELISSA *** (in caps to get her attention!) could tell us how to do it, is to reduce the write speed to lower than the drive/disc combination would use by default. Its certainly easy to believe that a given disk type might work better at less (though not a *lot* less) than its given maximum rating. Melissa, is this possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheetah Posted June 3, 2002 Report Share Posted June 3, 2002 Ian, I did have that same thought about lowering the write speed in Retrospect. I know it can be done easily in stuff such as disc ripping programs. Also, the 24x 7 16x discs were CDRs whereas the 10x was a CW-RW disc. I would like to be able to use the RW for the main backups and CDRs for the incremental parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted June 3, 2002 Report Share Posted June 3, 2002 You cannot change the write speed with Retrospect. The drive we load takes care of what speed it is going to write at. It will try to write at the most optimized speed that it can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted June 6, 2002 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 Melissa -- The Plextor Manager appears to allow me to change the maximum drive speed. Does Retrospect respect any limits I might set here or does your interface bypass these controls? Ian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted June 6, 2002 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 Melissa -- I understand this reply, but it seems strange. I have a backup member on which 9 files in the final session failed verification with a -206 error. You are suggesting that I need to set this entire member missing, which will force a backup of some 600MB or more (in this case), just to backup these 9 files. This sounds strange to me because you say that if the verification pass fails due to "modified time and date", Retrospect will backup the affected files automatically next time around. This suggests to me that the *verification* logic in your program correctly handles changed files, but not unreadable files. Which, considering the quality of your product as a whole, I find difficult to believe... Ian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 NO. Not exactly. ANY file that fails in backup or compare is marked for rebackup next time. BUT my statement was any CD that gets a 206 error, you shouldn't trust as a good cd. You may not be able to restore ANY files if the cd gets a 206. That is why I said to basically retire that whole cd. I sort of mean - why take the chance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted June 6, 2002 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 Yes, I agree with you. If the disk has raised a 206 there's a question mark over it. But if I do a manual verify to determine the extent of the damage then, knowing that Retrospect knows it has to redo these files I have a choice depending on the extent of the damage. In my case I have 3 backups: 1 to online disk, and 2 to CDROM, one copy of which is always offsite. Knowing Retrospect's tendancy to raise 206 errors at the drop of a hat, even on the best quality media, I just wanted to make sure that I could check what I had, and what I didn't have (using a manual verify), and that Retrospect would backup the stuff that failed verification next time around. Then I can decide whether to continue using the disk, mark it as missing, or simply to select to use a fresh disk for the next backup. (I've forgot what you call that.) I think I'm happy now...! Thanks for your patience... Ian ... ps. Sorry, I should have clarified that the reason for not wanting to "not take the chance" is the large number of extra disks this is liable to generate. It would be better to start each session on a fresh disk I could scrap if it got a 206 if I was going to do that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted June 7, 2002 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 Melissa -- Another question I'm afraid... If during a manual verify, Retrospect detects files it can't read that did verify ok before what does it do please? Also do you know if Retropect respects any maximum write speed I assign in the Plextor manager? Ian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 it will report an error on the media or the files. Retrospect does not respect any speed you change the plextor manager to. Retrospect will use the most optimized speed that it can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanWorthington Posted June 7, 2002 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 Thanks Melissa. 1. If there doesn't exist a later copy of the files, do they get marked to be backed up again next time around? 2. Would it be possible to raise the option of allowing the user to reduce the CDR write speed, within the limits allowed by the disk of course, with your technical folks as an additional tool to try to reduce the number of 206 errors on equipment which otherwise appears fine? Ian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 1. yes. 2. Good suggestion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.