TheGoldyGopher Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 My retrospect server has become over the past month or so extremely slow in doing the backups and I am at wits end trying to figure out what the deal. The vitals: Retrospect 7.6.123 on AMD 2.6 Opteron with 4 GB RAM and SAN attached Fibre Storage with two logically mapped drives. We have 200 clients in 19 Proactive groups, in which most are 15 users. Each group has its own source and destination. The clients are mostly laptops and all have relatively the same version of client, which of course I can’t find the Version Number, but it from Circa April time frame on Windows XP, MAC OS, and Linux. On approximately October 1st we were regularly backing up 150 to 175 clients, between Oct 1st and Nov 1st that number has dropped to maybe 50 clients. The problem to me appears that something changed in how the queuing system works for proactive backups, but I can’t prove that. We seem to be constantly be checking to see if laptops which are not connected to the network are there. So if your queue looks like: 1) Attached 2) Not Attached 3) Not Attached 4) Attached 5) Not Attached 6) Not Attached 7) Attached We appear to back up computer 1 fine, and than the queue spends 20 minutes deciding computers 2 and 3 aren’t attached to back up computer 4, than spends 40 minutes deciding computer 2,3,5, and 6 aren’t attached before backing up computer 7, and then spends an hour before getting to computer 9. The computers at the end of the queue just don’t seem to be getting backed up. When this process started I had 8 Queues and 40 or so computers in each of the queues, so we cut it in half. Once the computer get attached to Retrospect the backups seem to be going a lot faster and in talking with the Networking staff the ports involved have no red flags or cause for concern. Any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauricev Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Something is working right and something is not. When Retrospect finishes a client in proactive list, it rescans the entire list from the beginning, which is the behavior you're seeing, so this part is working right. If a client is not available, Retrospect by default spends a little under a minute to decide that and move to the next client. But in your case, it's taking 10 minutes. That's wrong, but I don't know why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgs Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 If a client is not available, Retrospect by default spends a little under a minute to decide that and move to the next client. But in your case, it's taking 10 minutes. That's wrong, but I don't know why. Jeff, check the DNS settings on your server to make sure they're correct. Also, if there are any computers that you can "forget", I would do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Do you know if users are clicking defer? Can we get a screenshot of the proactive backup sources when the problem happens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoldyGopher Posted January 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) Currently users cannot defer (Countdown Timer set to 0). The following are two screen shots. The first shows what the process is looking like and the second a few seconds later when it resets. Retrospect checked the source of ULWIL-454-AT (the highlighted source) and than quickly flashed retry and reset everything to blank and moves back to the top of the list. Edited January 6, 2010 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoldyGopher Posted January 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) Currently users cannot defer (Countdown Timer set to 0). The following are two screen shots. The first shows what the process is looking like and the second a few seconds later when it resets. It checked the source of ULWIL-454-AT (the highlighted source) and than quickly flashed retry and reset everything to blank and moves back to the top of the list. Edited January 6, 2010 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoldyGopher Posted January 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) I should note that we upgraded to 7.7 in December. Edited January 6, 2010 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoldyGopher Posted January 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) Duplicate Edited January 6, 2010 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.