Source keeps duplicating itself in the list

[ttubbiola]

I have a fairly simple setup (with a LOT of data) and am having a strange issue with one of my backup sources.

 

Setup:

XServe (10.5.8) acting as a backup server only.

Retrospect version 8.2 (399)

XSan volumes mounted as local drives.

Backing up to an Exabyte Magnum 448 (LTO3) via direct fiber connection.

 

I am backing up 2 SAN volumes (roughly 14 TB each) locally on the XServe. One of the volumes is continually failing to back up. It appears in the sources list as offline but a 2nd copy of it appears as available but unprotected. Basically meaning that it is not being backed up by my script.

 

I have deleted the source completely and recreated it with the same result on the next backup attempt. Obviously with this much data the attempts take a week or so.

 

Has anyone else seen this behavior? Also, is there a way to change the order of the sources in a backup script?

 

I have already opened up a ticket with Retrospect but there were no level 3 techs available to talk to me so I am waiting for a call from them.

 

Thanks for any info or ideas.

 

Tom

[rhwalker]

Also, is there a way to change the order of the sources in a backup script?

Sadly, no.

 

From the Roxio Retrospect 8.2 Read Me:

 

Known issues with this release

 

Sources cannot be reordered in standard backup scripts. Sources are backed up in the order that they were added to the script. Proactive Backup scripts will automatically adjust the order of computers being backed, assigning those least recently backed up the highest priority. This functionality is planned for a future release.

Russ

[Daniels]

Actually the description of the last statement is not true since I have found sources in non-proactive scripts are backed up alphabetically.

[dangermouse]

I just had this happen. I believe the source duplicated after the upgrade to 8.2, not sure though.

 

I checked the detailed path to both sources, /Volume/etc..., and both were identical. DF in Terminal also showed only one such volume was mounted.

 

So I went ahead and deleted the source selected for backup, but showing as off-line. I then selected the other one for backup in the same proactive script.

 

The backup ran fine, it recognised the 'new' source was in fact the 'old' one and only backed up a normal, incremental, amount of data.

 

I'm not sure if this is exactly what you did? Or did you delete both references and Add another back in?

[CallMeDave]

The backup ran fine, it recognised the 'new' source was in fact the 'old' one and only backed up a normal, incremental, amount of data.

 

In fact, had the "new" source actually been different, Retrospect still would have only backed up changed or new files.

 

That's how the program works.

 

 

Dave