bcarillon Posted August 19, 2008 Report Share Posted August 19, 2008 I get this from time to time on my backups. What memory is it talking about? I have plenty of space availble on the destination. 8/19/2008 2:59:29 AM: Connected to Richard Helms - 8/19/2008 2:59:29 AM: Copying Richard Helms on Richard Helms… Scanning incomplete, error -108 (not enough memory) 8/19/2008 3:04:00 AM: Connected to Tech Services - 8/19/2008 3:04:01 AM: Copying Tech Services on Tech Services… Scanning incomplete, error -108 (not enough memory) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted August 19, 2008 Report Share Posted August 19, 2008 Available RAM on the backup server. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcarillon Posted August 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2008 I currently have 4GB on the server, is that considered too low? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webdeck Posted August 23, 2008 Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 I see this error with the latest Mac server when backing up a Linux client. I don't see it for any Mac or Windows clients. Whenever I see this error, I quit and restart Retrospect and then it backs up the Linux client fine. I'm seeing it about once a week. I never saw this error until I upgraded to the latest version with the new Mac OS X native client. My server has 3GB of RAM and doesn't run anything other than Retrospect. -Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcarillon Posted September 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Well, my backup Mac is not running OS X Server but is running Mac OS X 10.5.4 and I now have 8GB of RAM and I'm still getting this error. Any ideas? Scanning incomplete, error -108 (not enough memory) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macintech Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Same thing here, just started recently. So probably the update to the new version of both Retrospect and Client (which seem to only work together, which no one mentions in the docs, and why is one 6.1xxx and one 6.2xxx????). Also seems to be related to starting to use hard drives (as ejectibles) rather than tape library. We are not as well powered as most, still using an xServer G4 (10.4 server) and it is maxed out at 2 GB RAM, but we never had this error in the past. does anyone have the resources to get EMC to recognize that this is happening, since I'm not seeing any solutions suggested? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestar Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 (edited) Here's a "me too" post. Anyone found any solutions to this? I was optimistic that the recent client update last week would be the fix, but alas, no dice! I've noticed that the two clients that consistently give me the dreaded "error -108 (not enough memory)" error are hooked into the network wirelessly rather than via ethernet. Anyone else noticed this correlation? In addition, my server running Retro is running Leopard Server on a first-gen G5 with 5gb of memory (should be plenty), but all the clients are Intel based. I wonder if that has anything to do with anything.... Cheers, Stephen Edited November 3, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bchern Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 Nope, neither of these conditions apply to the clients that tend to get the error here. I've noticed that the two clients that consistently give me the dreaded "error -108 (not enough memory)" error are hooked into the network wirelessly rather than via ethernet. Anyone else noticed this correlation? In addition, my server running Retro is running Leopard Server on a first-gen G5 with 5gb of memory (should be plenty), but all the clients are Intel based. I wonder if that has anything to do with anything.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted November 4, 2008 Report Share Posted November 4, 2008 I get this from time to time on my backups. What memory is it talking about? I have plenty of space availble on the destination. It's talking about the Random Access Memory required to keep track of all the files on the Source. So it has nothing to do with available disk space, just the number (not size) of files. - How many files are in the Backup Set you are using? - How many files are being scanned on the Source you are using? You may need to segment your backup using defined Subvolumes. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrbiker Posted November 18, 2008 Report Share Posted November 18, 2008 I just started getting this one, too. Here's what happened: I installed the new program 6.2.230 on the server and the client 6.2.229 on just one machine because I ran out of time and couldn't update all our 25 systems. The system I installed it on is in the middle of the backup process - "Lon's Computer." EVERYTHING BACKS UP FINE before Lon. Lon's system gives me: Scanning Incomplete, Error -108 (not enough memory). Every system after that gives the same error WITH THIS EXCEPTION: All Windows disks (boot camp partitions) back up fine on the same systems that error out when they are backing up the OS X partition. I'm going to switch back to the older client 6.1.130 which doesn't error on the other systems. As an admin, I always save 2-5 previous versions of all upgrades. For example, I have every OS X combo update for both PPC and Intel going back to 10.4.7 and 10.5.2 I'll unwind my one client and let you know what happens. Mike P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted November 18, 2008 Report Share Posted November 18, 2008 Every system after that gives the same error WITH THIS EXCEPTION: All Windows disks (boot camp partitions) back up fine on the same systems that error out when they are backing up the OS X partition. It's unclear exactly what you are doing when it fails, and what you are doing differently (or similarly) when it succeeds. - Are you using the same Backup Set for "Lon's Computer" that you use "before Lon"? - Are you using the same Backup Set for the BootCamp partitions that you use when you back those machines up as OS X clients? - What Type of Backup Set is being used in each situation? Of course, other questions directly up-thread remain unanswered; they might be germane to your situation as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonHendry Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 (edited) We've also been seeing this. Starting about a week into a new backup set, I have to restart Retrospect every few days. Right now our current backup set has 277GB for 840,992 files, 3 members (tapes), 312 sessions, 16 snapshots. It was started October 10. What is worrisome to me is that I had a corrupted catalog on a prior backup set, and tried to rebuild it from the tapes (VXA-2 80-160GB). Retrospect worked at it for about 20 hours, but finally failed with an out-of-memory error. I hope these backup sets aren't too big to restore from. (Our server is a recent-vintage Mac Pro quad core, with 2GB, running Leopard Server and Retrospect server x.230. Retrospect is its main duty, apart from some light file serving. There are about 12 clients, all Mac.) Edited November 24, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinn Posted December 1, 2008 Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 OK, this has been a problem since '03 as far as I can see here. Is EMC/Danz doing anything about it? Is there a solution? We have a very recent MacPro which had 2GB RAM and does nothing but back up several servers and a few desktops. After seeing this (for some time), I increased the memory to 7GB, but still have the same result on one server. Re-starting, Zapping PRAM makes no difference. Must I break down the home folders into sections? Is it a matter of having too many folders? The backup server is running OS 10.4.11, and version 6.1.138 of Retro Server on a 2.66GHz dual Intel. Thanks, ...Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Is EMC/Danz doing anything about it? Of course they are! They are in the process of re-writing Retrospect for Mac OS X from the ground up. Is it a matter of having too many folders? Probably too many files. Which is pretty much the same thing. Must I break down the home folders into sections? If that works for you, then yes, you must. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhwalker Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Must I break down the home folders into sections? Is it a matter of having too many folders?The backup server is running OS 10.4.11, and version 6.1.138 of Retro Server on a 2.66GHz dual Intel. Tom, Note that you are / will be running into two issues. (1) (Carbon code) Retrospect running emulated (Rosetta) on Intel architecture - memory limitations there because of Rosetta and Carbon. This limitation will be removed when Retrospect X arrives (real soon now?). (2) if you do "break down the home folders into sections", you need to do it by Retrospect "subvolumes" because, if you use "Selectors" to choose which files get backed up, Retrospect still scans and analyzes the entire volume, and the file count will not be reduced as it is with "subvolumes". Hope this helps, Russ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonHendry Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 (edited) Here's some additional data. Hopefully the formatting will be intelligible: RSIZE VSIZE TIME/DATE Retrospect start:35.60 MB 1.02 GB 8:34 AM 12/08/2008 211.07 MB 2.59 GB 14:23 PM 12/10/2008 Backup Compression failed, error -108 ~9:30 AM 12/11/2008 245.18 MB 2.93 GB 11:00 AM 12/11/2008 258.90 MB 3.04 GB 15:37 PM 12/11/2008 Scanning incomplete, error -108 ~9:08 AM 12/12/2008 284.00 MB 3.29 GB 09:51 AM 12/12/2008 Edited December 12, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 We've also been seeing this... OK, so now we learn that your error is referring to an inability for Retrospect to compress its catalog. - Do you get errors if you disable catalog compression? I can't imagine that a Mac Pro quad core would have any problem providing ample hard drive space to store catalog files of any size. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonHendry Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 (edited) What's weird is that it doesn't always fail to compress. After that error appeared, later attempts to compress the catalog worked. If I quit Retrospect and restart, the problems go away for a while, though the catalog must be about the same size as it was before the restart, because it's the same backup set. I also don't think catalog compression is the reason why scanning failed with the -108 error. What's clear is that the amount of memory Retrospect is using (or 'using' in the case of VSIZE) grows over time. And the -108 errors don't occur until VSIZE starts approaching 3 GB. My guess is there is a memory leak, which grows until there isn't enough room for catalog compression or client scans. (Unfortunately, as a CFM app, it isn't compatible with the 'leaks' tool, otherwise I'd monitor that.) Edited December 12, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 I also don't think catalog compression is the reason why scanning failed with the -108 error. OK, well, you could always turn compression off and see if the problem goes away. That's the goal, no? Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonHendry Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 (edited) "OK, well, you could always turn compression off and see if the problem goes away. That's the goal, no?" Well, no. The goal is to get past the failure to scan client machines. If you look back at my original post, you'll note that the catalog error was only one of two -108 errors, one of which was during a client scan. I'm not sure why you're fixated on the catalog problem. If I wait long enough before restarting the server, the server can't successfully scan any machines at all because of scanning-related -108 errors, so nothing gets backed up. I'm pretty sure I've had it run out of memory with a -108 error during scans even when the catalog was not being compressed. The point of posting the data was to show the memory behavior of the server from a clean start until the -108 errors start appearing, in hopes of documenting the problem more clearly. Edited December 12, 2008 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 If you look back at my original post, you'll note that the catalog error was only one of two -108 errors, one of which was during a client scan. I'm seeing no such information in post #113920, the first post on this Forum made under the JonHendry handle. I'm not sure why you're fixated on the catalog problem. Actually I'm fixated on trying to help, and the only way I know (from a great deal of experience) to help is to start with complete and accurate information. If the Backup Set that failed on 9:30 AM 12/11/2008 with a compression error was then reconfigured to disable compression in advance of the 9:08 AM 12/12/2008 failure, then I'll cross that off my list and release my fixation to the wild. I feel so free now. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonHendry Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 Ah. I'm talking about the data I posted in #114384, which I thought you were referring to, since you posted soon afterward. It didn't occur to me that you were focused on a weeks-old post rather than my most recent post. The information in #114384 is about the general -108 problem that requires restarting Retrospect every few days. The catalog corruption mentioned in #113920 was not due to a memory problem, it was due to an unclean shutdown. The only memory problem there was Retrospect's inability to reconstruct the catalog because it ran out of memory. You seem to have leapt to conclusions in 114394 when you wrote "OK, so now we learn that your error is referring to an inability for Retrospect to compress its catalog." Yes, this error was encountered. It may be a symptom of the same problem that prevents client scanning, but catalog compression is not the problem of interest here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonHendry Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 "If the Backup Set that failed on 9:30 AM 12/11/2008 with a compression error was then reconfigured to disable compression in advance of the 9:08 AM 12/12/2008 failure, then I'll cross that off my list and release my fixation to the wild. " It was not reset, but it did successfully compress the backup set several times, and backed up several clients, before the 9:08 scanning failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.