Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cygnis

Weird matching problem

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I have repeatedly encountered an issue where files that have already been backed up fail to be matched (i.e. they get Previewed as needing to be copied again) when moved from one volume to another.

 

What makes the problem really weird is that I can make them match again (and thus avoid backing them up again) by defining a new subvolume pointing to a subdirectory of the existing subvolume which is failing to match.

 

Here is the most recent example. I have moved some files into:

G:\Graphics Storage\Graphics Finished\

 

They were originally in

F:\Storage\Finished\

 

"Storage" and "Graphics Storage" are defined as subvolumes. The files were all backed up under "Storage" (from the F:\ drive).

 

When I try to back up "Graphics Storage" (which has been backed up before these files were moved to it), the backup Preview indicates that all the new files will need to be backed up again.

 

When I define "Graphics Finished" (a subdirectory of "Graphics Storage") as a new subvolume, they all match, and Preview reports that no files need to be copied!

 

One thing I have observed is that the matching is almost instant when selecting "Graphics Storage", but takes a few seconds of scanning through Sessions when selecting "Graphics Finished". Because Graphics Storage has been backed up before, could the Matching process be considering only the previous snapshot, and not bothering to check other Snapshots/Sessions?

 

I am not using the "Backup file security information from servers" or "Match only in same location" settings. I cannot identify any of the standard Retrospect matching criteria as having changed. Could NTFS metadata that I can't see be an issue?

 

We are using Windows 2003 Small Business Server and the latest version of Retrospect 7.7 Single Server, backing up to LTO-1 tapes using an HP Ultrium 232 drive. Backup sources are local NTFS drives only. The server also runs ShadowProtect 4.0 (block-based volume backups) and Group Logic ExtremeZ-IP (Mac file sharing). Let me know if any other information is required.

 

Any tips would be appreciated. Thanks very much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could NTFS metadata that I can't see be an issue?

Yes, it can.

Backing up an external USB drive connected to an XP client and then connect THE SAME DRIVE to a Vista client and all files will be backed up again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Lennart. I have compared the NTFS alternate data streams (ADS) of some of the files to those of the backed up versions, and they are the same. Security attributes (ownership etc.) look the same too. Is there any other metadata I can/should check?

 

Unless there's some metadata item I've missed, my feeling is that metadata is not the issue here. It seems that Retrospect is simply failing to look outside the volume's last snapshot for matching files.

 

Is this how the program is supposed to behave?

 

I have found a workaround, which is to delete the "Graphics Storage" snapshot so that Retrospect is forced to match against all sessions, rather than just the one snapshot. This created a new snapshot without backing up all the files again. But I don't want to have to do this every time I move files from one volume to another.

 

Any more thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a one-off move from F: to G: , right? Just let Retrospect backup the files again and be done with the problem.

Not required now, due to the workaround of deleting the snapshot (assuming that a test restore brings the data back without any trouble). But yes, I would be prepared to just back the data up again in some situations. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

EDIT: You know this is a user-to-user forum, right?

To get support go to http://www.retrospect.com/support

Of course. I was interested in hearing the experiences/suggestions of other users who might be familiar with this issue. Were my questions in some way inappropriate for this forum?

 

I understand that you are a user, not an employee, and apologise if you felt the questions were directed at you specifically (rather than to the forum in general).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Were my questions in some way inappropriate for this forum?

Not in the slightest way. :)

Just making sure you didn't expect an official support response.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×