Jump to content

Trust my backup to this?


Recommended Posts

Why should I trust my backup to a program that shows the following in the log?

 

- 11/23/2007 12:36:26 PM: Copying Macintosh HD…

Can't read file “purpleggttwT”, error -43 (file/folder not found), path: “Macintosh HD/private/var/folders/0P/0PIkJNwhFvuGCg7pGg7qbE+++TI/-Tmp-/purpleggttwT”.

Can't save catalog, error -108 (not enough memory).

11/23/2007 7:39:01 PM: Execution incomplete.

Remaining: 1 files, 1 KB

Completed: 1558326 files, 53.2 GB

Performance: 150.9 MB/minute

Duration: 07:02:35 (01:02:09 idle/loading/preparing)

 

and then when you try to repair the catalog it says

 

∆ Retrospect version 6.1.138

launched at 11/24/2007 11:26 AM

+ Retrospect Driver Update, version 6.1.13.101

Internal consistency check failed:

Assertion check at "elem.c-918"

Quit at 11/24/2007 11:27 AM

 

...

 

With errors like this how do I know I'm going to be able to recover when I need to recover?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first error is not a problem; it simply reflects the normal operation of OS X and the creation/deletion of temporary files.

 

The second and third events are, of course, problems that would indicate something going wrong.

 

But as requested in the existing thread that you have already started, information that might help has yet to be provided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. define a subvolume for every directory under /

2. define a source group for every subvolume

3. set source on the script to the source group defined above

 

Is this any less memory intensive than simply backing up / as one source/volume?

 

If I'm reading things correctly it sounds like it operates on a per volume basis such that when it updates the catalog it will only need a single volumes information in memory at a time. In which case using multiple volumes should do the trick.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

Here's once again why I don't like Retrospect calling a directory a "subvolume". What did you mean, Mayoff? Retrospect's expression for it's restricted view on just one folder or a physical disk's virtual subvolume?

 


Um, Retrospect uses this term in the traditional sense as used in Computer Science:

Wikipedia definition of Volume

 

And, from Webster's dictionary, the definition for the prefix "sub-":

"of a smaller size; of a subordinate nature"

 

So, it's a portion of a volume. Sorry you don't understand well-known concepts. See also "man chroot".

 

If you wanted to define it as a "directory", you could do so, and it would be that subtree of the filesystem, but its usage is a bit different than just a directory because it includes the entire filesystem subtree down from that directory node, not just the directory itself. Its use in Retrospect is to avoid scanning of an entire volume by a Selector (filter).

 

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

I wasn't aware any more of the existence of the term «partition».

 


The reason that the term "partition" has fallen out of favor is because of the complexities of RAID, network shares, etc. The term "volume" is generally preferred now because it is the logical abstraction that hides the implementation details. It's the "volume" that gets mounted and which holds a filesystem.

 

Perhaps it's just semantics, perhaps not. In the days before RAID, network shares, etc., where everything worked at the physical disk layer, it was all much simpler.

 

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...