Jump to content
1df469ef-ea43-4597-b6aa-e9796fcd4cd9

Error -557 ( Transaction Already Complete)

Recommended Posts

We applied the latest update, 7.7.533, and now all of our Windows 2003 servers are reporting:

 

T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception

Can't back up Removable Storage Manager, error -557 ( transaction already complete)

 

We did not have this error before the upgrade.

 

We have done the following:

 

1) upgraded a test server to client version 7.7.114 from 7.7.106. Error still reported

2) deleted client from server and readded. error still reported.

3) uninstalled client , rebooted, re-installed 7.7.114. error still reported.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

This -557 error is a bug. Our engineers have fixed this along with a bogus 1017 error. We will have a bug fix release out within a month. Until then, users may need to downgrade to the prior version to avoid the error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

This -557 error is a bug. Our engineers have fixed this along with a bogus 1017 error. We will have a bug fix release out within a month. Until then, users may need to downgrade to the prior version to avoid the error.

 

Hi

 

Is the "T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception" message related to this bug or something different? I have two clients, both 32-bit, that have this message under 7.7.533 that didn't under 7.7.341. A third client running Windows 7 Professional 64-bit gives no errors. (I'm using Retrospect Professional.)

 

The log entries for the two clients are:

 

2011-03-09 09:22:33: Copying Pushka-NB Windows 7 Home Premium (C:)... on Pushka-NB

T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception

Can't back up Removable Storage Manager, error -557 ( transaction already complete)

T-44: MapError: unknown Windows error -2,147,217,405

T-44: W2dbWMIDbOp: pWMIRep->BackupREGDB failed, osErr -2147217405, error -1001

Can't back up WMI Repository, error 76657252 ( unknown)

 

2011-03-09 09:41:33: Copying Snowball-VM XP Professional (C:)... on Snowball-VM

T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception

 

 

2011-03-14 09:13:50: Copying Pushka-NB Windows 7 Home Premium (C:)... on Pushka-NB

T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception

T-44: MapError: unknown Windows error -2,147,217,405

T-44: W2dbWMIDbOp: pWMIRep->BackupREGDB failed, osErr -2147217405, error -1001

Can't back up WMI Repository, error 72462948 ( unknown)

 

2011-03-14 09:25:54: Copying Snowball-VM XP Professional (C:)... on Snowball-VM

T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception

Can't back up Removable Storage Manager, error -557 ( transaction already complete)

 

 

2011-03-18 10:18:55: Copying Pushka-NB Windows 7 Home Premium (C:)... on Pushka-NB

T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception

T-44: MapError: unknown Windows error -2,147,217,405

T-44: W2dbWMIDbOp: pWMIRep->BackupREGDB failed, osErr -2147217405, error -1001

Can't back up WMI Repository, error 72594020 ( unknown)

 

2011-03-18 10:30:26: Copying Snowball-VM XP Professional (C:)... on Snowball-VM

T-36: main: transaction terminated by PDS exception

Can't back up Removable Storage Manager, error -557 ( transaction already complete)

 

The first backup was with both clients on 7.7.106, the second backup with both on 7.7.114 and the third backup with Pushka-NB on 7.7.106 and Snowball-VM on 7.7.114.

 

I'll roll back Retrospect Professional back to 7.7.341 and run another backup in a day or so to see if the other errors besides -557 go away.

 

 

Regards, John >^-.-^<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<br />I'll roll back Retrospect Professional back to 7.7.341 and run another backup in a day or so to see if the other errors besides -557 go away.<br /><br />

 

 

Hi

 

I've now run a backup and all the errors on both clients are now gone.

 

Regards, John >^-.-^<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

This -557 error is a bug. Our engineers have fixed this along with a bogus 1017 error. We will have a bug fix release out within a month. Until then, users may need to downgrade to the prior version to avoid the error.

 

 

What do I need to downgrade to? And is it just the server or the client as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were running 7.7.341, connected a new tape drive and ran backups and had issues. Retrospect would get to the point where it would do the verification after copying snapshots to tape, and then sit and ask for the tape that was in the slot. We had two copies of Retrospect, both running 7.7.341, connected to a different LTO4 tape library on each, and both servers were doing the same thing.

We upgraded to 7.7.533 and our tape problems went away, but then started having the issues listed in this thread. What can we downgrade to? If we down grade to 7.7.341 our tape drives didn't work properly, and the new version causes errors.

Also, on downgrading, do you just install the old version over top the new or do you have to remove the old program through add remove programs then install the new?

Does this affect your previous settings, scripts, etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were running 7.7.341, connected a new tape drive and ran backups and had issues. Retrospect would get to the point where it would do the verification after copying snapshots to tape, and then sit and ask for the tape that was in the slot. We had two copies of Retrospect, both running 7.7.341, connected to a different LTO4 tape library on each, and both servers were doing the same thing.

We upgraded to 7.7.533 and our tape problems went away, but then started having the issues listed in this thread. What can we downgrade to? If we down grade to 7.7.341 our tape drives didn't work properly, and the new version causes errors.

Also, on downgrading, do you just install the old version over top the new or do you have to remove the old program through add remove programs then install the new?

Does this affect your previous settings, scripts, etc?

 

Yeah, 7.7.533 does fix a few legitimate problems like the tape one you just mentioned and Exchange 2010 for me, so I'm living with the bugs on one server that needs it. I suspect this will all be resolved with a new build within a month. You can install the previous version over the newer one with no issues, no uninstalling first or anything. If you had to step way down to 7.6 that's a different story since the catalog file structure has changed with 7.7. I took a few servers back to 7.7.341 with no issues at all though, very quick and painless. You might be stuck in my shoes with needing 533 to resolve an issue and living with the errors for a little bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, 7.7.533 does fix a few legitimate problems like the tape one you just mentioned and Exchange 2010 for me, so I'm living with the bugs on one server that needs it. I suspect this will all be resolved with a new build within a month. You can install the previous version over the newer one with no issues, no uninstalling first or anything. If you had to step way down to 7.6 that's a different story since the catalog file structure has changed with 7.7. I took a few servers back to 7.7.341 with no issues at all though, very quick and painless. You might be stuck in my shoes with needing 533 to resolve an issue and living with the errors for a little bit.

 

Thanks for assisting.

For now, we are going to try going back to 7.7.325 and see how that works. That's the last release under EMC, and the one that we didn't have any problems with.

I called support, and they didn't have that installer available, but I managed to find a copy on one of our servers and that seems to be working so far.

Big test will be the weekends tape jobs, and tomorrows scripts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we also downgraded from 7.7.341 (Multi Server) to 7.7.325 because of the tape drive problems. As we do not use Exchange, it's probably better to stay with 325 until the new built will be available. But I'm not sure if 7.7.533 would be worth the effort for us.

 

Downgrading from 7.7.341 to 325 worked without problems, so I expect downgrading from 533 should work as well. Not sure if this would be a feature with the developers when looking at version numbers. Can we assume all 7.7.* versions would allow downgrading?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same problem here after upgrading from Retrospect 7.6 to 7.7.533. As .533 is the first 7.7 version I've used, I don't have the old installers. This problem causes Retrospect to hang basically whenever it occurs, which is constantly. Jobs get stuck and never complete, and the execution slots are permanently tied up. This version of Retrospect appears to be 100% useless. Where can we get the old (.341?) installer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where can we get the old (.341?) installer?

That IS a good question... We always archive these when they roll out, so we have them available locally.

 

Maybe Robin Mayoff can arrange for the old version to be available on the Roxio server?

I gladly would attach it with this post, but I'm not sure that's allowed, plus there is a 2MB file limit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contacted online support and got the response that they refuse to help me because I bought the product more than 1 month ago. (I did, but didn't install it until last week) Most ridiculous thing I've heard. They're now selling a product that doesn't work at all and refuse to help customers get a version that does work. Amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contacted online support and got the response that they refuse to help me because I bought the product more than 1 month ago. (I did, but didn't install it until last week) Most ridiculous thing I've heard. They're now selling a product that doesn't work at all and refuse to help customers get a version that does work. Amazing.

 

Did support "refuse" to help you all together or did they offer you a chance to purchase a support incident? The policy is that free support is available for 30 days after purchase. Otherwise you must buy a support contact or support incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they refused unless I bought a support contract. So basically, anyone who upgrades to the latest version and didn't happen to keep the old version's installer, OR just bought the product but didn't install (or realize it was unusable) until 30 days after buying, is just SOL with Retrospect currently unless they buy a support contract I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they refused unless I bought a support contract. So basically, anyone who upgrades to the latest version and didn't happen to keep the old version's installer, OR just bought the product but didn't install (or realize it was unusable) until 30 days after buying, is just SOL with Retrospect currently unless they buy a support contract I guess.

No, you don't have to buy a support contract. You can buy a support incident for just $70.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While that's not an unfair price, in this case it should be possible to just get the older installer for free, as a gesture of good service. If I recall correctly, under EMC rule you could always download some of the older versions. Because Roxio bought Retrospect they actually have no older (Roxio branded) versions than the current (and former buggy) one. I can imagine Roxio is not allowed to make an EMC branded version available. This is probably the real problem.

 

In this particular case I feel that Roxio should look at this problem more from a client's perspective. Roxio's (only) two versions of Retrospect are bugged in a way the client can't really use the software in a reliable fashion. How can that reasonably be a problem the client needs to pay for to get resolved? I mean there is a solution available as the last EMC version of Retrospect that in all likelihood will be useable for the client. Proof is most of us still use the older EMC version (especially when you also use tape drives).

 

It would be the best thing marketing wise if Roxio would first develop a version of Retrospect that's less bugged (they are working on that I'm sure) and for the time being would be more lenient and offer some support for free. Software will always contain bugs, but when they become so annoying the program becomes unusable that shouldn't be the client's problem...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After I pointed out the ridiculousness of the situation, online support seemed to eventually agree and recommended that I download the trial version off the website (which happens to be 7.7.341). I uninstalled the current version from the Control Panel, then installed the trial download, and everything came up perfect (no configuration lost) and is actually working now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's good to hear BRF, thanks for the update and glad you got a resolution. As a reseller and supporter with a lot invested in Retrospect, I was starting to cringe at where the conversation was going.

 

Ramon, you have a silver tongue, very politely said. I sincerely trust and hope many of these issues are being taken seriously by Roxio and will be resolved in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's good to hear BRF, thanks for the update and glad you got a resolution. As a reseller and supporter with a lot invested in Retrospect, I was starting to cringe at where the conversation was going.

 

Ramon, you have a silver tongue, very politely said. I sincerely trust and hope many of these issues are being taken seriously by Roxio and will be resolved in the long run.

 

Who has decided NOT to remove version 7.7.553 from the update page? This version does not work at all and a big warning label must be posted.

Do retrospect not care about there customers at all.

 

Regards

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who has decided NOT to remove version 7.7.553 from the update page? This version does not work at all and a big warning label must be posted.

Do retrospect not care about there customers at all.

I think you might be exaggerating a bit. Some users like Aaron do use 7.7.553 and live with its shortcomings.

 

Apparently there will be a new version available in the next two weeks that hopefully addresses the most important issues. One has to understand that it's not feasible to write error free code and code testing for a product like Retrospect is quite difficult and time consuming. However I do wish Roxio would be more transparent when it comes to listing known bugs etc. so end users could make an educated guess which version would work best for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you might be exaggerating a bit. Some users like Aaron do use 7.7.553 and live with its shortcomings.

Maybe it's useful to some people, but this particular bug should be discovered during even the most basic of pre-release QA testing. The fact they post it without a warning does seem to indicate they either don't care, or don't test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's useful to some people, but this particular bug should be discovered during even the most basic of pre-release QA testing. The fact they post it without a warning does seem to indicate they either don't care, or don't test.

Maybe this bug doesn't surface in all scenario's they tested or can test? It's hard to test software very thoroughly due to the massive amount of possible iterations of soft- and hardware. This is probably the reason the fixed version isn't released yet, as they are still testing (which can take more time and resources than actually fixing/developing). Normally you would just keep (or revert to) the old working version, but that's not directly available due to the Retrospect ownership transfer (however there seems to be a way after reading BRF's earlier post in this topic).

 

Besides that, testing new/updated software before production usage is something an system engineer/admin also should do before implementing and running into trouble. Fact is a lot of admins don't and get mad at the developer when there's a problem while they should have tested it themselves in the first place.

 

We all want the perfect product an a perfect world, but in real life bugs are just a fact of life. Which doesn't mean you can't feel annoyed a bit when you run into them, nor should software developers (and the marketing departments) forget to strive in the general direction of 'perfect' software. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×