mac.ron Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Hi! First of all, my configuration: Multi Server Engine @ Mac mini Core 2 Duo with Mac OS X Server 10.4.11 Clients on different kinds of Macs (Mac OS X Server 10.5.6, Mac OS X Client 10.5.6, ...) Console @ MacBook Pro with Mac OS X 10.5.6 As I hoped to finally be able again to run the well and reliantly working Retrospect backup software on a current system again (since I was forced to use Retro6 on an old 10.4 backup G4) I also wanted to replace the TimeMachine backups now. The problems arising with proactive backups seem to be discussed often enough in this forum. I just want to add me having the described problems also: After defining the first (or second) proactive backup script, the engine starts to hang, disconnects and finally dies; finally I had to reinstall and completely configure anything from scratch -- three times now. This also happens if proactive backups are paused before -- I really tried this often! Another thing that really bothers me is the network performance when backing up Retrospect Clients: Backing up a 180 GByte folder (with mainly big files) from the 10.5.6 server (using the Retro client over gigabit ethernet) to an USB2 hard drive locally attached to the backup computer now runs for 22 hous and will certainly go on for three hours more ... Performance is displayed with 135 MB/minute. Is this really all I can be expecting from Retrospect 8??? The network performance of the server I am backing up is actually much much higher and TimeMachine was also very much faster even when working over the network. Backups performed locally (disk to disk) appear to be a bit faster (250 MB/minute) but this is also not what I've been expecting. Another feature request I have -- besides from seeing what tags really "contain" -- would be the option to test a rule on a folder or client as it was possible in Retrospect 6. Also it would be fine if the rules GUI would be ... working like it is supposed to be. Cheers, Ron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 What is your exact version of 8.0? Do you have any crash logs in the OS X console? Does the Assert_log.utx file get updated when it crashes? If you are running 8.0.608 and you would like to report a "crash bug" with Retrospect 8, please download an update to the Retrospect engine found at: http://download.dantz.com/archives/Retro-800609-test-build.dmg This update does NOT fix any bugs or add any features. It does allow Retrospect to generate additional debugging info using the Apple Crash Reporter. The crash reporter logs will be very helpful for debugging crashes in the Retrospect Engine. Under 10.4.11 If you can't stop the engine, you can try using the terminal: To stop the engine: sudo launchctl unload /Library/LaunchDaemons/com.retrospect.launchd.retroengine.plist To start the engine again: sudo launchctl load /Library/LaunchDaemons/com.retrospect.launchd.retroengine.plist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac.ron Posted April 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Hi Robin! My Retro8 version is 8.0 608.1. After the current backup completed, I will install your 609 release. From the first installation which went down the drains I copied the Assert_log.utx file. How should I send it to you? btw, to stop the Engine under 10.4, I use Lingon (1.2.1 for 10.4), which is a bit easier to use. Additionally, you can easily change the nice value ... For all of us who don't feel safe in the Terminal :-) Can you tell me anything concerning the performance issues? Thanks, Ron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 You can post logs as attachments to your forum post. I have setup your permissions. Use Full reply mode. My performance to USB disks is much higher then yours (double or triple in some cases). Every environment is different. Do you use compression or encryption? Even the file size has an impact on performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac.ron Posted April 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Attached you find the assert_log.utx of my first installation. I use encryption, yes. But does it have this effect? The CPU load is at about 25 to 30 percent. The network should be able to make 2000 MB/minute, mathematically of course ... And the files I am backing up are 20-30 MBytes big (it's mainly hires images, .dmgs and .zip archives). Cheers, Ron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 (edited) 20 to 30 MB is not very big. Encryption will impact speed if the computers involved are not very fast. I would try a disk media set with no compression or encryption backing up a local volume (local to the engine) and see what speeds you get. The crashes are logged as bug 21930. If you can get the crash reports running the special debug version, that will be helpful. Edited April 16, 2009 by Guest 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.