Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I hope someone can help me here. I am running Retrospect 8.2 on a MacBook Pro, with a Drobo, which has worked seamlessly for the past 2 years. Having just returned from a 2 week break, I find that it is not backing up anything at all, and it has no members in the Media Set (Status. No Members – Grey Blob) See screen shot.

 

Can anyone shed any light on why they have disappeared, and more importantly, how do I get them back.

 

I have to say, I don't find Retrospect as easy to fathom as earlier versions, or maybe thats just me.

 

Thanks in anticipation.

 

 

David Bell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure it isn't just a display glitch? I mean, how can the media set contain files, but no members?

 

Have you tried restarting the Mac running the Retrospect Engine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lennart,

Thanks for your response.

 

I don't think its a display glitch. If I try to run a script, I get the same thing with the selected Media Set. See screen shot.

Yes, I have totally restarted both the Mac/Retrospect and the Drobo.

 

 

David

 

This has happened to me numerous times since the update to Retrosuck 8. Sometimes nothing helps but deleting the media set and recreating. (ive tried repairing, rebuilding, rebooting, no luck)

Wish I had better news for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Maser

I've seen this where it looks like a Media Set is missing members -- but it's actually not -- and a quit and relaunch of the Console makes things appear correctly.

 

 

If there are active Activities running (a lot of them) when you launch the console, it's a good idea to wait a few minutes after launching it to let it catch up to display everything.

 

For example, I have 8 media sets running with 8 proactive scripts. On occasion, if I fire up the console, it'll indicate that one of the 8 is missing members -- when it's clearly not. A quit/relaunch of the console clears this up. Usually what I do now is just fire up the console, click on "Activities" and once *that* is populated (and I can manipulate things there) -- *then, and only then* do I do anything that would modify things (like make new rules, etc...)

 

 

I would agree, though, that the console process should probably take a higher priority than other activity processes -- and hopefully that is being addressed in the upcoming update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to what Steve says, remember that it's the engine that does all the actual work. As long as the engine knows the makeup of the media sets, the sources, scripts, and schedules, etc., your backups will be performed correctly. In other words, trust the operation of the engine more than you do the console.

 

The console is just a window into the engine and, as many have noted, its communication with the engine leaves much to be desired. As an extra precaution, I try to always be sure to quit the console when I don't actually need it, to avoid the chance that some unwanted or incorrect information might be passed to the engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am aware of the sluggishness of the console, but in the occasions that I mentioned above, no activities would run and the only solution was to nuke the media set and start over.

Similarly whenever i get a catalog out of sync error, nothing fixes aside from recycling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, trust the operation of the engine more than you do the console.

 

Ahem. That doesn't actually feel too well, does it. It's like recommending the pilot to trust the flight computer even if all the displays issue warnings and stuff. "Somehow the brain behind the GUI will know what to do"... that isn't actually a very clever thing to do if you are about to trust your data to a system.

 

to me it's just one more sign of the many flaws of RS, once you get a bit more serious in terms of data size and sources count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahem. That doesn't actually feel too well, does it. It's like recommending the pilot to trust the flight computer even if all the displays issue warnings and stuff. "Somehow the brain behind the GUI will know what to do"... that isn't actually a very clever thing to do if you are about to trust your data to a system.

 

to me it's just one more sign of the many flaws of RS, once you get a bit more serious in terms of data size and sources count.

Well, at least it's better than the opposite. What if the GUI said "all is well" when it actually is not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be even worse. But that doesn't make the situation good now. How do you check if the engine is doing something meaningful, if you have no GUI and you have no way to check the engine e.g. using a shell?

No, of course it doesn't make the situation good.

We are all aware of the flaws of the console.

The best we can do is exit the console when not in use and launch it again when we need to check the engine.

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

×