Jump to content

giraffe279

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

giraffe279's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. I am running Workgroup Version 5.0 on a Mac OS9.1 server with both OS9.1 and OSX clients. Prior to this I was running Version 4.3 before upgrading some clients to OSX. Under 4.3 my typical throughput on my 100BaseT network when backing up a client was around 120 - 150MB/minute. Since the upgrade, I am seeing the same network performance when backing up my one OS9.1 client, but much degraded performance on all OSX clients (typically 40MB/Minute). As the client volumes are much larger in size and file count since the upgrade to OSX, this means I have to wait many hours for an initial backup. Can anyone enlighten me on why this is so and what I can do to improve the throughput? There is no other traffic running on my network during the backup sessions. Thanks.
  2. Thankyou for your help so far. Here goes: 1. Yes, it occurs on both local and client volumes 2. I uninstalled 5.0 on the OS9.1 server and re-installed 4.3. This seemed to work fine with both local and client volumes. I then re-installed 5.0 which worked OK the first time after installation but then on subsequent backups it reported the communication error as before. (Note: This was exactly what happened the first time I installed 5.0). I then tried a different mac as my server and had exactly the same results ( worked first time but reported communication error on subsequent backups. After that, I stumbled across something which seems to have fixed the problem (so far!): Because OSX seems to add a huge overhead to the clients in terms of folders and files (My 3 OSX clients all have 100,000+ files and folders each), I had to increase the memory allocation for retrospect, otherwise it would crash when trying to catalog the volumes. I have 320M available on the OS9.1 server, so I allocated 150M to retrospect. I found that the communication error seems to happen when I increase the memory allocation to Retrospect. On a fleeting hunch, I checked my memory control panel and noted that virtual memory was ON with an allocation of 320MB. I turned this off and re-started, and (so far) I have not experienced any problems! I will keep you posted on how this continues. Can you tell me though - does this solution make sense to you? I now have another problem however which I have placed in another post - "Version 5.0 network performance". Thanks
  3. Hi There, Info as follows: Retrospect Version and build : 5.0.205 Computer Model and speed: Mac 9600/350 with 500M XLR8 G3 Processor Upgrade OS X version and build : N/A for Server - server is running OS9.1. Some clients are running OSX, some are running OS9.1 - problem is the same for both Device (from Retrospect's Configure > Devices > Device Status window): Exabyte EZ17 Autoloader and Exabyte Mamoth 2 Drive Device firmware (in the version column of the Device Status window) : EZ17 is 1.10; Mamoth 2 is v04b Device interface : Ultra 2 SCSI Media brand and size : Exabyte Mamothtape 225m AME with smartclean Other Devices: Firewire/USB card in PCI slot Adapter Card : Initio Miles2 U2W Adapter Card firmware: 1.05 Adapter Card driver for OS X : N/A - server is running OS9.1
  4. Can anyone tell me if there is any known compatibility problem with the Initio A100 U2W (Miles 2) SCSI card for MAC running Firmware 1.05, with Retrospect 5.0 running on MAC OS9.1? I can't see a SCSI card compatability list for OS9.1/Retrospect. Thanks.
  5. I wish I had an answer, but I can only add to the list - I upgraded my Retrospect 4.3 to 5.0 on Mac OS9.1 to support new OSX clients on the network. Since the upgrade, I am getting a consistent "102 - Communication Error" message from my Exabyte tape library - it keeps telling me to change to a new tape - but as in your case, changing the media makes no difference. 4.3 was working fine for me, so this is a real $%&*! - I haven't been able to backup for days. In my case, I am investigating with Exabyte if there is a more recent firmware upgrade available for my tape library. But if that doesn't work, I'm out of options. Frustrating to be sitting on a $6000 library and not be able to backup.
  6. I have been running Retrospect Workgroup 4.3 (for Mac) successfully on a G3 mac for the last 12 months. This was connected to 5 Mac Clients and an Exabyte EZ-17 M2 tape library with the ADK 1.8 installed. I upgraded to retrospect 5 because I had to support OSX clients on the network. Now I am frequently getting an error 102 message (trouble communicating) from the tape library - tells me to switch tapes, but then I get the same message on the next tape. When I purchased, Dantz told me that I no longer needed an ADK with version 5. Any clues anyone? Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...