jerryc Posted January 31, 2004 Report Share Posted January 31, 2004 Just bought and installed the upgrade.... None of my scripts are working (and I mean NONE!!).. All are erroring with "The catalog is pre-6.0 and read only"..... I have checked permissions (all are RW!); I have repaired permissions (3 times); I have re-started as root and repaired permissions.... I am getting numerous "chunk checksum errors" and the recommendations on help screens are VERY bad.... What the heck is going on?? I have tried ever repir and rebuild that I'm aware of...none are working. The "repair file backup set" is crashing my G4 server (soft crash)...the CPU continue to function but I get the beachball in the Finder and can't Force Quit Retrospect. I'm running OSX 10.2.8 on a G4 with 1 gig RAM. This was a very, very bad "upgrade".... and for $200, it has so far cost me thousands.... Please tell me this is my fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted January 31, 2004 Report Share Posted January 31, 2004 Quote: Please tell me this is my fault. It's your fault. Wow. That was easy! OK, the first issue you report is obvious; Backup Sets created with Retrospect 5.x are read only in 6.x; Dantz has stated that in order to accomodite the major changes (breaking the terrabyte limit, solving much of the Unicode issues, etc) they were forced to change the way files are stored in catalogs (and I suppose on the media too). So you can Restore from old catalogs, but you can't append to them. Your other issues are less clear; when are you getting the errors/crashes? When you attempt to continue to work with these older catalogs? Does the program crash when you create a new Backup Set? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macmandude Posted January 31, 2004 Report Share Posted January 31, 2004 So how come there isn't a utility to change 5.1 storage sets into a new 6.0 compatible version? sm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted January 31, 2004 Report Share Posted January 31, 2004 Quote: So how come there isn't a utility to change 5.1 storage sets into a new 6.0 compatible version? Prolly for the same reason Apple never made a utility to change HFS volumes to HFS+. It's either impossible, or simply too difficult to make work. Someone on another thread here on the Forum had success using the Transfer feature to move files from one Backup Set to another, but that would probably work best with File Backup Sets (or else you'd need to have two tape drive online...). Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerryc Posted January 31, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2004 I guess I expected that answer.....sigh. I see the crashes when I'm trying to rebuild a backup catalog, using a backup on a firewire connected hard drive. The rebuild screen begins, the files start coming in, I get a flash of some kind of message that says ".........slow" (sorry, but I didn't get a snapshot of it). Also, I'm getting an error: "Internal consistency check failed: Assertion check failed at: elem.c-821" I guess I begin remaking all my scripts..... Thanks again for your comments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 Having to restructure the format of backup sets is entirely understandable. What is not understandable is Dantz's comprehensive failure to announce this issue IN ANY OF ITS DOCUMENTATION. As far as I can tell, it is not mentioned in pre-sales literature, the owner's manual, the readme file, the tutorials, or anywhere else. I have two tape backup sets that between the two of them have about 60 gig of space left. And VXA tapes aren't cheap. I'm going to have to uninstall 6.0, reinstall 5.1, and finish off those backup sets before I can even use the 6.0 that I just spent 60 bucks to upgrade to. Is Dantz that unconcerned about its customers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 Quote: What is not understandable is Dantz's comprehensive failure to announce this issue IN ANY OF ITS DOCUMENTATION. As far as I can tell, it is not mentioned in pre-sales literature, the owner's manual, the readme file, the tutorials, or anywhere else. I agree! At the very least, Dantz should have written something in the ReadMe like: "Older Backup Sets: The format that Retrospect uses for backup sets' catalog files has been changed to support some of the new features. Users will need to create new backup sets in order to back up data. The new backup sets will not be recognized with previous versions of Retrospect. Older backup sets will be treated as read-only. While users will not be able to append to pre-existing backup sets, they will be able to restore data from them, and will be able to recreate the older backup sets' catalog files from their media if necessary. " Then they should have included that ReadMe with the software, and posted it on their web site. Maybe even as an article in their KnowledgeBase. http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=kbase&ACTION=KBASE&id=28121 Oh. Right. Never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbizer Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 Retrospect 6 continues to have problems with its WINDOWS. Sometimes its status window will pop up in th emiddle of an application, and I can't get it to go away, even if I choose "Hide Others." But just now, things were much worse than that. I was doing a lot of things while Retrospect was in the background (incremental backup to external firewire hard disk), such as scanning and using Photoshop Elements. Retrospect's status window popped up during the backup, and I managed to hide it -- but then I could get it to reappear, even after I foregrounded Retrospect 6; all I could see was the spinning cursor. I eventually heard the sound that indicated that the backup was done, I managed to quit Retrospect, and relaunched it in order to look at the log. Nothing unusual there. But when I tried to view the contents of the backup set, Retrospect couldn't find the catalog file-- although it was clearly on the firewire hard disk. Somehow, during the backup, the catalog file got corrupt. Now I'm rebuilding it, and I see a long list of messages in the log like this: "Bad Backup Set Header Found." I *never* saw this error or had this problem in 5.1. Does anyone know what might have happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 Quote: ericmurphy said: Having to restructure the format of backup sets is entirely understandable. What is not understandable is Dantz's comprehensive failure to announce this issue IN ANY OF ITS DOCUMENTATION. As far as I can tell, it is not mentioned in pre-sales literature, the owner's manual, the readme file, the tutorials, or anywhere else. I have two tape backup sets that between the two of them have about 60 gig of space left. And VXA tapes aren't cheap. I'm going to have to uninstall 6.0, reinstall 5.1, and finish off those backup sets before I can even use the 6.0 that I just spent 60 bucks to upgrade to. Is Dantz that unconcerned about its customers? Actually, we note it in ALL of the document types. I am not sure how it was missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldesktop Posted February 24, 2004 Report Share Posted February 24, 2004 Actually, Alsoft wrote a utility to convert volumes from HFS to HFS+. In this case, Dantz owns the Intellectual Property to Retrospect and its own file format, so your point doesn't wash. The fact is that there needs to be a converter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbeckman Posted February 24, 2004 Report Share Posted February 24, 2004 I, too, had the same misunderstanding, because of this ambiguosly-worded error message. The message should read like this to be clear: "The catalog is pre-6.0 and IS THUS read only"..... otherwise the message sounds like it is reporting two unrelated pieces of information: (1) that the catalog is pre-6.0, and (2) that it's permissions are SET to read-only." Since the manual and docs never mention this issue, there is no reason users would expect that R is in fact not backward-compatible with previous versions. I, too, discovered that R crashes when trying to reconstruct Pre-6.0 backups, which should be a process that only requires reading the archive. My concern now is that I don't have access to any of those old backups without re-installing and running R5. -mel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted February 24, 2004 Report Share Posted February 24, 2004 Quote: I, too, discovered that R crashes when trying to reconstruct Pre-6.0 backups, which should be a process that only requires reading the archive. What are the steps you're taking that cause the crash? - What type of Backup Set are you working with? - Tools->Repair? Then what? (Rebuild Existing, Rebuild from source or Repair File?) "Reconstruct" is not a Retrospect action. - What sort of crash do you observe? Does Mac OSX log the crash? The update to 6.0 includes a tech support incident credit, so you can call Dantz and talk with them about this issue. In fact, if it turns out to be a bug in the program, you can even ask for a credit back on your credit! If Retrospect 6 can't recreate (rebuild) 5.1 catalogs from the media (tape, CD, etc), that would be bad. If it can't update existing 5.1 catalogs, that would be ok since you can't add to them anyway. BUT of course the program shouldn't crash, it should just provide an alert. Knowing what you're doing will help a lot here. My concern now is that I don't have access to any of those old backups without re-installing and running R5. Access? You can Restore from pre-6.0 backup;so you can access your older backed up data. And if you want to append to a 5.x Backup Set then yes, you'd need to use 5.x to do it. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.