Jump to content

Don Lee

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Don Lee last won the day on July 7 2017

Don Lee had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Don Lee's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. Console 16.6 appears inadequate. It appears that this bug is in 16.1 server. I am using 16.1 because until very recently, I had Mac OS X 10.6 machines, and 16.1 is the last version that supports Mac OS X 10.6.
  2. I upgraded my server to Retro 16.1 recently, and started using Console 16.1 as well. I immediately started having trouble with the options on the clients being cleared. All of the "Allow client to:" options would be cleared every time I "touched" a client with the console. This is not a problem with Retro console 14.6, nor console 16.6 It's pretty annoying on the 16.1 console.
  3. A few comments: The amount of data moved is the biggest factor in backup speed. I am experimenting with grooming to do what I think you are doing. Rather than doing a recycle backup , I've thought about grooming the media sets down to one backup. That way, you never really do a "full" backup - much faster. Firewire 800 is not so fast these days. For some operations, disk speed is key. Thunderbolt drives may be the ticket. For many things on Retrospect, CPU speed of the server is the bottleneck. Make sure you have plenty.
  4. Page 15 in the Mac v13 documentation says: (under "what's new") Portable Backup Sets/Media Sets Retrospect v11 for Windows and Retrospect v13 for Mac now allow customers to move the member folders of disk sets to new locations and let Retrospect know by simply editing the members and picking the new location. There are scenarios where moving these files is preferable to a set transfer. Oops.
  5. I don't see anything in the forum about this, but it appears to me to be a serious bug. I cannot seem to "move" a disk media set. I have - many times in the past - moved a disk media set from one disk to another. Manually changing the path name in the "member" and/or rebuilding the catalog would restore the "moved" set to be usable. In Retro 14.6.1 (mac) _and_ Retro 12.6.1 (Windows) I am having the same problem. If the files of a disk media set are copied from one disk to another, it is not possible to "restore" it to health. It seems quite impossible. I've tried several permutations of repair, rebuild, manual manipulation of the path(s), and even removing the catalog before rebuild. The best I can do is get it to show "green" in the console and then when I try to use it, the execution gets stuck on "waiting for media". If I try to "find" the media (member(s)), it either ignores me (Mac) or fails with an error (Windows). Has anyone else seen this? I'm guessing it is a new bug in a recent upgrade, because this used to work. No, I have not tried to re-install an old version to see if that would work.
  6. As far as I can tell, the Mac "console" is only properly supported with the Mac engine. It can control the Windows engine, but Retro support tells me that's risky, and unsupported. (and can cause corruption) There is no "console" app for Windows as far as I know.
  7. I have been playing with grooming, and became interested in the difference between "performance-optimized" and "storage optimized" grooming. What's the difference - exactly? I looked in the documentation, and found that the main docs are here: https://www.retrospect.com/en/support/kb/grooming-tips-and-troubleshooting Unfortunately, the first item on that page is: "1. Choose your grooming mode: "Performance-optimized grooming" or "Storage-optimized grooming". See Documentation for more details." Note that the "Documentation" link goes to a page that says not a word about grooming. Where is the answer to my question? Is the difference between "performance" and "storage" optimized grooming described anywhere? Thanks,
  8. My thoughts exactly, although I was not aware of my "competitor" saskia. Years ago, in a galaxy far away, I used to use Retrospect's script hooks, and as I recall, they were quite useful. It seems it is time to explore the new incarnation of those hooks. I will, of course, report back. P.S. "fair" is indeed a four-letter word. ;->
  9. Thanks. I'll have to try the new header/footer. This is nice, but would be even nicer if it had some variables to plug in from Retro. The marketing collateral also implies that I can customize the "daily email report", and I don't see any docs at all on that. The Mac daily report is easy on the eyes and helpful. The Windows engine generates something different, that looks like it was intended to be machine readable, and is much less helpful.
  10. OK. I give up. Where is the documentation that tells me how/where I can customize the email reports on backups and the daily summary email? (which I really like on the Mac)
  11. I have both Windows and Mac installations, and I have recently updated a Windows site to v12.5, and a Mac site to 14.5. I see the emails from these systems is different now. The mac version produces "pretty" HTML formatted emails, including the new "backup report", which is very nice. The same option exists on Windows, but produces a mass of raw text that I have not yet deciphered. It may be a machine-readable report that imports nicely somewhere, but I don't know where. I assure you that it is not very "human readable". Is this expected? Am I missing some option somewhere that causes the emails to be "pretty" from Windows Retro v12.5? What is intended to be don with this "report"? Now I am generally NOT a fan of "pretty" email. I would much prefer plain text in 90% of the cases, but…. in this case the output from Windows is a little too opaque, even for me. Thanks for your help,
  12. FWIW, I did restore files from teh reported error messages, and they came back intact. My limited testing verified that these are not "real" errors.
  13. FWIW - Retrospect support told me that these are not real errors, only errors in the verify process. The data and datasets are intact. I will read the "dzelenik" posts...
  14. I have seen BIG improvements in the time taken to "sync" when initially bringing up the console on the Mac. Kudos to Retro Dev. Performance improvements that let me be more efficient with my time are always appreciated and welcome. Thank you.
  15. The Mac console code may be "common" and might compile and run on Windows, or it may be very Mac-specific and be a ton of work to port. I certainly don't know. If the former, it might be pretty easy to get the Windows "console" going. I think that would be a significant feature/improvement. If the latter, it may be not worth the substantial trouble. It is interesting, though, that the engine on BOTH platforms runs the same "communications" machinery, even though on Windows it is almost completely unused. Odd, but interesting….
  • Create New...