Jump to content

rhwalker

Members
  • Content count

    5,089
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rhwalker

  1. rhwalker

    Flashing Question Mark

    That's very useful information. Russ
  2. rhwalker

    Numerous tape errors reported

    I tried looking for your drive, and couldn't find it. You may need to get another drive. Only three. (1) Wait for the Retrospect big bugfix update (expected "real soon, now"), see if that solves your problem. If it doesn't, you've got hardware problems. (2) Try another tape drive. If this one is still in warranty, get an RMA unit from Tandberg. If not, get another tape drive. It really sounds like this drive is having problems. (3) Try this drive on a different computer, with a different cable. If you are able to borrow / buy another tape drive, that would help narrow down the problem. Otherwise, you seem to be doing all the right things. Did this drive ever work with this configuration? Russ
  3. Ok, but you still haven't answered questions necessary to answer your inquiry. See my post upthread. Also, make sure you read the "Read Me" for Retrospect 6.1.x - The Retrospect 6.1 backup set format is different from the Retrospect 6.0.x backup set format. Here is the link: Retrospect 6.1 for Macintosh Read Me Finally, you don't say whether you also installed the Retrospect Driver Update, or what version. You should. Russ
  4. Um, you ought to delete that attachment, which has license code information. It's unclear what you are trying to "upgrade" to. Are you trying to upgrade to some version of Retrospect 8? Or to the last released version of Retrospect 6.1 (that upgrade/update is free, see Twickland's link above). If you are trying to upgrade to some version of Retrospect 8, then you should repost in the Retrospect 8 forum because that's really a Retrospect 8 question, not a Retrospect 6.x question. The Retrospect 8 forum is here: Retrospect 8 for Macintosh forum Also, when you repost, needed information that you haven't provided is: (1) What flavor (Server? Non-Server?) of Mac OS X and version (10.x.x) are you running on each of the PPC machines? That will determine whether you need a Retrospect server client license for the second machine. (2) Do your PPC machines meet the minimum requirements for Retrospect 8? Note that Retrospect 8 (at least 8.1.x) runs VERY poorly on a PPC because the media set format is Intel-native (little endian) rather than PPC native (big endian), necessitating lots of byte swapping. (3) If you are moving to Retrospect 8, note that the Retrospect console must run on Mac OS 10.5 (Leopard) or greater. (4) I'd suggest waiting a bit until the big bugfix release for Retrospect 8.x arrives ("real soon, now"), which is rumored to have many bugfixes and stability improvements for Retrospect engine running on PPC. Russ
  5. rhwalker

    Numerous tape errors reported

    Well, I'd suggest trying to run diagnostics on the drive. The standard Tandberg/Exabyte diagnostic is here: Tandberg/Exabyte ltotool diagnostic and there seems to be a more recent "tdtool 1.0" diagnostic for LTO drives here on the Tandberg web site: Tandberg tdtool 1.0 diagnostic No, these errors are not normal. However, it's not clear whether they are caused by a Retrospect issue or the drive. Again, I suggest running diagnostics. Russ
  6. rhwalker

    Flashing Question Mark

    Well, a few points: (a) As I indicated, I've not used tape via FiberChannel, so I've never used the Exabyte/Tandberg diagnostics via FiberChannel, only via SCSI. ( As you will note, the diagnostics are a bit dated. Perhaps they don't support FiberChannel. © It's a bit unclear from your post - you are running the diagnostics on the computer that has the FC interface, right? The diagnostics only work on directly-attached devices that appear in Apple System Profiler, and don't have any networking code. (d) Also, you would need to stop Retrospect engine in order for the engine to release the devices for the diagnostic to be able to grab them. Ok. Only reason I mentioned the firmware was that our Exabyte drive and autoloader weren't up to recent revision level when we got them, and update was necessary. I assume you are on top of that. OK, I think others are using that card successfully. I haven't personally used it, so I can't comment one way or the other. Well, I'd suggest doing it from the drive. Retrospect 8 is a bit immature right now. Even with Retrospect 6, Retrospect would get confused when a cleaning tape was used (because, unlike other tapes, the cleaning tape would auto-eject after the cleaning cycle), and Retrospect would wait forever for the tape to appear at BOT - necessitated quitting and restarting Retrospect. Even if you try from Retrospect, if it doesn't work, well, just file a bug report. And it might be productive simply to wait for the big bugfix update ("real soon, now") so that the bug report would be meaningful and have a chance of being addressed. Just now I noticed a more recent Tandberg tape diagnostic tool on their website (tdtool, version 1.0) that indicates it supports DAT and LTO for all interface types (USB, FC, SCSI, SAS). Perhaps this is the new replacement for the older Exabyte diagnostics that I have used. You might want to give it a try. The link is here: tdtool 1.0 diagnostic Russ
  7. rhwalker

    Retrospect sold to Roxio...

    Sam, let's cut the Retrospect group, and especially Robin, some slack. I've never been accused of being a Retrospect fanboy but, having been through sales of several high tech companies for which I worked and managed engineering groups in my youth, I've seen the glitch that happens when this occurs. And lets get real - Robin wasn't out negotiating the deal with Sonic / Roxio on behalf of EMC on his own, and was probably as much in the dark about the backroom dealings as you and I are. Robin has been remarkably positive for years, and that's a good thing. Lesser people would have walked away. His job, and the job of the Retrospect team, is to get a reliable and competitive product out the door. Let's cut him and the Retrospect team some slack while they do that. Russ
  8. rhwalker

    Flashing Question Mark

    Yes, it does. I suggest that you run the Tandberg (Exabyte) diagnostics to make sure the LTO 3 drive is working well. Here is the link: Tandberg (Exabyte) ltotool diagnostic Also, although the error messages don't indicate problems with the autoloader / library, you might want to run the Tandberg (Exabyte) autoloader diagnostic. Here is the link: Tandberg (Exabyte) libtool diagnostic It's a bit unclear from your post just which LTO-3 (Magnum 224) version you have, but here are the firmware updates: Tandberg (Exabyte) LTO 3 firmware updates It would be helpful if we knew how the tape drive and autoloader were connected to the xServe G5. FiberChannel? If so, what interface card? SCSI? If so, what HBA interface card? FireWire? I've never used FiberChannel, but I have used SCSI for years with tape, and some HBA cards (Adaptec, and the Apple-rebranded LSI Logic 22320) have problems. Been there, done that. Have you used a cleaning tape to run a cleaning cycle for the heads? You might want to set this aside until the Retrospect 8.2 update arrives ("real soon now"), which is expected to improve stability on PPC computers. Russ
  9. rhwalker

    error -3217 unknown

    Mary, this is the Retrospect 8.x for Macintosh forum. The Retrospect 6.x for Macintosh forum is here: Retrospect 6.x for Macintosh forum I suggest that you repost in the right forum. Retrospect 6.x and Retrospect 8.x are very different animals, and help for one is not applicable to the other. Russ
  10. What version of Retrospect 6.1? (6.1.x) Did you install the Retrospect Driver Update ("RDU") for Retrospect 6.1.x? The RDU version and Retrospect 6.1.x version will print in the Retrospect log each time Retrospect launches. Did you turn the Retrospect 8.x engine off when you try to run Retrospect 6.1.x? If you don't, then Retrospect 8.1 will have grabbed the devices. While you can INSTALL Retrospect 8.x and Retrospect 6.1.x on the same computer, you can't have them both running at the same time because they compete for devices (and for the Retrospect networking port, if you have Retrospect clients). Retrospect 8.x engine is always running unless you disable it. Russ
  11. Worked for me when I made the post (I tested before posting, of course) and still works for me now. Russ
  12. No, that Retrospect is using specified API calls that just happen, for legacy reasons, to have the prefix SCSI. If you don't have the device in question so that you can test the poster's problem for reproducibility, or if you don't have any relevant experience, don't speculate. It's doesn't help to contribute noise. Russ
  13. rhwalker

    Rules for Windows

    I would suggest that you make a copy of that rule and then edit that copy for your specific needs. The distributed rules have, over the past decade or more, often been out of date as far as pathnames, etc. Consider them a "starting point", as you may already be doing. Russ
  14. My guess is that this is the Apple rebranded LSI Logic 22320 (see what Apple System Profiler says). If so, it's a piece of junk. We never got that card to work right in our Xserve G5. Replaced it with an ATTO UL4D and all the problems went away. Now, admittedly, that was with Retrospect 6, not Retrospect 8. But all the Mac tape backup vendors (and Apple engineers, off the record) will tell you to get the ATTO card. I suggest that you use the Tandberg (Exabyte) lto diagnostic to test the tape drive. If the drive can't pass that diagnostic, there's no hope for Retrospect. Here's the link: Tandberg LTO diagnostic utility Also, I would suggest that you set this aside until the Retrospect 8.x update comes "real soon now". You might be chasing bugs fixed by the update. Russ
  15. Respectfully, I don't think you have a clue. I understand that you are trying to be helpful, but the original poster should disregard your posts. There is no such thing as a "Firewire SCSI" device, and the Exabyte VXA drive is certainly no such animal. Russ
  16. The secret is revealed: Forum Attachment Rules Change Russ
  17. Ok, then let's step back a bit. Please explain fully and exactly what you are doing, and what version of Retrospect (x.x.x) you have. Perhaps posting some screen shots would help. See: Forum Attachment Rules Change Define "don't work" and the behavior you expect. Russ
  18. rhwalker

    BETA

    Hey, let's not kick the dog. We should all applaud that EMC software release procedures may be headed in the right direction. Someone at EMC had the courage to insist that this release be done right. People are working hard. Let's cut them some slack. And I agree with Steve Maser. I don't know about the rest of you, but it's a significant chunk of my time to shake out a major piece of software like this prior to putting it into production, doing regression tests, etc., to ensure reliability. I'd rather not waste my time, and I don't care if it "crashes fast". Russ
  19. rhwalker

    DVD visible but blanks aren't Seen

    Are you SURE that you opened the bundle's package file to find this, rather than looking at some other "retro.ini" file? Check your path again: /Library/Application Support/Retrospect/RetrospectEngine.bundle/Contents/MacOS/retro.ini You will have to ask EMC Support about that. These are user-to-user forums, and I have no inside information. Russ
  20. Perhaps. However, it would seem to be specific to the Firewire version of your drive. I've got the SCSI version of the same drive, with autoloader (attached to an ATTO UL4D) and have never seen this error with Retrospect 6.1.230, RDU 6.1.16.100, on our Xserve. russ
  21. That's not possible. Snow Leopard (Mac OS 10.6.x) only runs on an Intel architecture Macintosh, and does not run on a PPC G5. See: Apple Mac OS 10.6 Snow Leopard system requirements Perhaps did you make a typo? Russ
  22. rhwalker

    "Needs Media" stops all backups.

    If your data is not worth a $70.00 support call, it's not worth backing up. Good support costs money. Anyone using this product to back up their valuable data should buy an annual maintenance contract. It's worth the money. Russ
  23. rhwalker

    Full Backup - Off-Site

    Or, my suggestion would be to set up a RAID 1 mirror, then split the mirror at an appropriate time, giving an instantaneous copy. That's how we (and many others) have always cloned our servers while keeping them up. There are a few minor details to watch (shut down services and databases prior to the mirror split so that everything is sync'd to disk, etc.).
  24. rhwalker

    Copying tape contents, any suggestions?

    The GUI could stand many improvements. Right now, the buglist is so large that bug issues prevail over GUI improvements. Russ
  25. rhwalker

    Copying tape contents, any suggestions?

    Sounds like you aren't using barcodes, because that might have prevented the issue. I strongly suggest using barcodes, and I also suggest making the barcode labels correspond to the member and media set names. For example: 1-A 0001 2-A 0001 3-A 0001 (etc., for members of media set A 0001) 1-B 0001 2-B 0001 3-B 0001 (etc., for members of media set B 0001) If you give your media sets (f/k/a/ backup sets) names that correspond to the media type and that relate to the barcodes, it becomes easy to retrieve the right tape when Retrospect asks for a tape member. For example, using the above barcodes, have media sets named: VXA Set A [001] VXA Set A [002] ... VXA Set B [001] VXA Set B [002] ... LTO Set A [001] ... DAT Set A [001] etc. We use Tri-Optic barcodes, and I have been very satisfied over the years: Tri-Optic barcodes I think it's a very good idea, but the only way I know to do it at present is to buy Tolis Tape Tools and use the unix "dd" command. It's been requested before, but the best there is with Retrospect is the Transfer (now known as "Copy Media Set") command, discussed upthread. And, if you think about it, Retrospect's approach might be the only approach possible because Retrospect writes all the way to EOT. The problem that Retrospect would have with such a feature (duplicating tape members rather than duplicating media sets) is that a tape member is uniquely identified by Retrospect in its catalog, so that Retrospect knows which member holds which data. If, for example, two tapes don't hold the same amount of data (tapes do differ in length, whether because of differences in inter-block gaps caused by different transfer rates as the processing load changes, or because of slightly different tape lengths), it might not be possible to "replicate" one tape member onto another. Remember, Retrospect writes until it hits EOT (or decides that the tape is bad because of errors), then moves to the next member. Actually, tape is a bit more complex than that, in that physical EOT (the metal strip) is located well before the actual end of tape (so that the tape doesn't come off the reel), and the driver can write a few more blocks before writing the EOT mark (logical EOT). The metal strip (physical EOT) is more of a warning than an actual hard limit. Just a bit of trivia for those of you who haven't had the pleasure of writing tape drivers. Russ
×