Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by roobieroo

  1. This is pretty terrifying. I noticed that most of my clients are only getting about 30 or so files backed up each night which didn't seem right so I started looking at the backups to see just what was getting backed up. I found that many files that have been created or modified since previous backups are ignored by Retrospect. For example, it may back up their Mail program's Envelope Index file but skip all email messages that they've received for the past few days. On a different computer a user had saved a number of files to her desktop that are no where to be found in Retrospect. Basically these backups are useless. If I perform a manual backup and preview what will get backed up it shows that the new mail files are checked for backup but the daily script is just skipping over them for some reason. I thought it was due to the ISA being screwed up but I disabled and removed it from all of the clients days ago. I'm using the exact same file selection rule for both the manual backup and for the scripted backup. I thought it might also be an issue with file matching but some of the files that it's skipping aren't anywhere on the backup to begin with. Retrospect is on a machine running Mac OS 10.8.2 and is version 10.0.1(105). The clients are running 10.0.0(174).
  2. Looks like I spoke too soon. Now, even the downgraded client that appeared to be working fails to back up any files.
  3. It appears to be a bug with the 6.3 client and possibly version 9 as well. Every client that doesn't work is running 6.3.029. I uninstalled it from one of my problem machines and reverted back to 6.2.234 and it now works as it should.
  4. Yes, everything looks as it should when I preview what is going to get backed up but for some reason the scanning never happens it just says the backup completed successfully with 0 files needing to be backed up.
  5. I'm having this problem right now. Version with a client on 6.3.029. Each time I try and manually run a backup of a folder that is a favorite it backs up 0 files and says that no files need to be copied which I can assure you is not the case. I believe this is also happening to some users for whom I've set up their Users directory as a favorite and despite never being backed up I got no files need to be copied errors. Backing up the entire hard drive works.
  6. It looks like when I was holding down the option key to make a change I wasn't clicking on the top most + sign. Very confusing and even with the manual it took me a few tries to get the rule to work. I guess I'll leave this here in case anyone esle runs into the same problem.
  7. In Retrospect 6, I was able to create a rule that would say: Exclude files that start with F2012 and end with .zip or that start with F2013 and end with .zip. With Retrosepct 10 however the rules are doing odd things. I create a new rule and go to Exclude files based on the following rules: but if I click on All of the following are true then nothing happens, it still says any. If I select None then it changes to Any of the following are true and below that it also shows All of the following are true. The only way to get All of the following are true to show up is to select None. Strange and not how it should work but whatever, it finally says All. I hit plus and add file name starts with F2012, hit plus again and add file name ends with .zip. Now I want to also exclue files that start with F2013 and end with .zip but if I add the additional criteria then the rule won't work because all of the statemnts aren't true. The file won't both start with F2013 and with F2012 or am I missing how rules work with the new version. Rule names also aren't being updated if I try and view them by running an manual backup. The rule names are showing up properly when viewed in Scripts, just not when trying to select them after clicking on the Backup icon to manually backup. What am I doing wrong? How to I creat a rule that matches either one set of critera OR matches another set?
  8. No changes made with the advanced network settings ever made a difference. It's not clear why Retrospect sometimes would bind to the correct IP address and other times would grab the loopback but I gave up and set all the machines up with static IP addresses. Fortunately they're all desktops in the location. Hopefully this is fixed with the version 10 client since I have some larger installations that will be getting upgraded before long.
  9. What do you do about laptops that use DHCP so their IP is frequently changing?
  10. I have a few clients running that seem to randomly go missing from Retrospect. The server is running 10.7.3 and Retrospect 9.0.2. I can test the address and add them using the direct IP address but multicast shows nothing. There is no firewall running on the client but it does run Parallels on occasion. Needless to say with computer that obtain an address via DHCP this is a real problem since they don't get backed up. Any tips or advice on how to get multicast working properly with my clients or do I have to statically assign all clients I want to use with Retrospect? It looks like multicast is broadcasting on the loopback address but not the primary ethernet port. Does this give any clues? Here's the /var/log/retroclient.log contents 1336662409: Client version is 1336662412: sopsFileLoad: gotBytes=1792 stateSig=53436667 firstVers=201 curVers=201 1336662412: NetStart: starting interface thread 1336662412: netCheckNewInterfaces: found new address 1336662412: ConnStartListen: starting thread ConnStartListen for 1336662417: netCheckNewInterfaces: found new address 1336662417: Turning client initiated discovery on 1336662417: ipludAddMembership: adding membership for 1336662417: iplud: multicast advertising on address 1336662427: IPNSRegister(0): registered: "Clerical","91c861ed1cb9d982","" 1336662427: ConnStartListen: starting thread ConnStartListen for 1336662429: notifyServerList: Client discovery packet sent to 1336662430: bindToValidBootPort: gServerPID has been initialized to 54 1336662431: SopsSetCurrentIPAddress: 1336662431: --- UpdateClientStateWithMonitorEntered: clientState:10 1336662436: netCheckNewInterfaces: found new address 1336662436: iplud: bind() failed with error 48 1336662440: bindToValidBootPort: task_set_special_port succeeded 1336662444: IPNSRegister(0): registered: "Clerical","91c861ed1cb9d982","" 1336662444: ConnStartListen: starting thread ConnStartListen for 1336662444: netCheckNewInterfaces: found new address 1336662444: iplud: bind() failed with error 48 1336662450: IPNSRegister(0): registered: "Clerical","91c861ed1cb9d982","" 1336662450: ConnStartListen: starting thread ConnStartListen for 1336663027: notifyServerList: Client discovery packet sent to 1336671869: connTCPConnection: non-stream packet too large: 101517849 1336671869: ServicePurge: serviceID 0 not found 1336672027: notifyServerList: Client discovery packet sent to 1336672060: ServicePurge: serviceID 0 not found 1336672070: ServicePurge: serviceID 0 not found 1336672411: ServicePurge: serviceID 0 not found 1336672417: NetGetMacAddr: This system's built-in MAC address is 3c:07:54:52:86:91 1336672418: SopsSetOnDemandServer: Setting to 1336672419: SopsSetFlags: theServer.parms.clientflags = 8602 1336672627: notifyServerList: Client discovery packet sent to
  11. Below are the results of my tests using Backupbouncer (http://www.n8gray.org/code/backup-bouncer/) after backing up and then restoring with Retrospect 9.0.0. Retrospect was running on a 10.7.2 machine and the backup source was running 10.6.8 server. I'd be interested to see the results from other tests to see if they are the same as I'm getting. :backup-bouncer-0.2.0 ladmin$ sudo ./bbouncer verify -d /Volumes/Src /Volumes/Dst Password: Verifying: basic-permissions ... ok (Critical) Verifying: timestamps ... ok (Critical) Verifying: symlinks ... ok (Critical) Verifying: symlink-ownership ... FAIL Verifying: hardlinks ... ok (Important) Verifying: resource-forks ... Sub-test: on files ... ok (Critical) Sub-test: on hardlinked files ... ok (Important) Verifying: finder-flags ... ok (Critical) Verifying: finder-locks ... ok Verifying: creation-date ... ok Verifying: bsd-flags ... FAIL Verifying: extended-attrs ... Sub-test: on files ... ok (Important) Sub-test: on directories ... ok (Important) Sub-test: on symlinks ... FAIL Verifying: access-control-lists ... Sub-test: on files ... ok (Important) Sub-test: on dirs ... ok (Important) Verifying: fifo ... FAIL Verifying: devices ... FAIL Verifying: combo-tests ... Sub-test: xattrs + rsrc forks ... ok Sub-test: lots of metadata ... ok
  12. If you call the sales number they just say "in a few weeks" and if pressed for a more definite date they'll tell you that they could give you something but it means little since it might just slip further and further back. What I find particularly odd is that if there is a major new release due in just a few weeks, why is there zero detail or mention of it on their website? Normally if something so improved is in the works, software companies want to get the word out. Especially when their current product has so many serious flaws and the hope for a working product may keep customers from taking their money elsewhere.
  13. Please do report back what kind of speed increase if any you see after trying those suggestions. I've given up on Retrospect 8 and am moving clients to other backup solutions. If they can speed up network backups and make things more reliable I'lll consider giving Retrospect another look.
  • Create New...