choogendyk Posted February 13, 2008 Report Share Posted February 13, 2008 I'm slightly puzzled. I have a handful of workgroups who are using the workgroup package of Retrospect to back up a few Macs running Mac OS X. They each have their own hard drive on my Solaris 9 SPARC server. I run both Samba and Netatalk. Two of these groups now have file archives in the 130GB range. I'm putting them on tape with my server side backup software. I'm just adding another workgroup, and on the first run they got an error message that there was a 2G limit for the file archive. They mounted the drive from the server using smb. I believe the others have mounted their drives with AFP. I would have to run over to their lab to get the version numbers, but they just bought Retrospect. So, it should be the latest for Mac OS X. I believe they are on 10.4 Tiger, but it could be 10.3.9. I believe their Retrospect "server" is a G4. Is there something obvious here? Something simple to change? Should I just have them mount the drive using AFP? Part of the reason I'm concerned is that I have another office that is all Windows PCs that recently bought the Windows version of Retrospect. I haven't heard from them, but I can see that their drive space has not been utilized yet. Are they going to have the same problem? I think they are all XP. My Samba is relatively recent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhwalker Posted February 13, 2008 Report Share Posted February 13, 2008 There are several issues involved here. (1) You don't indicate whether any of the Macs involved are Intel architecture, only that the Retrospect "server" is a G4. Retrospect is on an old code base that is emulated under Rosetta on Intel architecture. That could be one issue, but I suspect not from the context. (2) SMB is not SMB is not Samba. There are version differences. Depending on how the share is being presented, there could be a FAT32 limit of 2 GB. Investigate there. (3) AFP is not AFP. There are different versions. Most non-Apple vendors (including Microsoft) are running a many, many years old version of AFP (AFP 1.0) that has a 2 GB limit. Investigate there. The Mac cannot write NTFS, so that's not an option. Best bet: Check how the share is mounted ("Get Info" on the share on the Mac). Russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted February 13, 2008 Report Share Posted February 13, 2008 Quote: I would have to run over to their lab to get the version numbers Yes, do that. In fact, given the infinite patience of the internets, it probably would have been most efficient for your original post to have included critical information such as version numbers. Although Retrospect has worked with SMB volumes in some way and shape, it was only with the most recent 6.1.138 update that official support was added. Before that, the lack of an appropriate Retrospect Device Update (RDU) file would result in a 2.G limit on SMB shares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choogendyk Posted February 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2008 good cop, bad cop? not quite like the old time Dantz responses to the retrospect users list. Anyway, good info in both replies. I ran over there and the office was closed. I've sent a request for a time that I can get in or for them to email the information to me, and I will post it here when I have it. I had indicated that they just bought Retrospect, so it should be the latest version. However, as you indicate the most recent update might be required, it's possible they got something that CDWG had in the warehouse for a while. I'll know soon enough, and, if it's that simple, I can update it and/or the RDU. "Retrospect is an old code base"? That doesn't sound good. Is there work on updating it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choogendyk Posted February 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2008 OK, the log was still up on their screen, so they had no trouble copying it to an email. Here it is: [log] Retrospect version 6.1.126 launched at 2/12/2008 11:41 AM * ELB Lab PowerBook G4: logged into client database + Normal backup using Backup Script at 2/12/2008 6:06 PM To backup set Backup Set A - 2/12/2008 6:06:44 PM: Copying Macintosh HD Can't add that much data to backup set. The limit is 2.0 G. 2/12/2008 6:21:24 PM: Execution incomplete. Remaining: 184170 files, 12.3 GB Completed: 0 files, zero KB Performance: 0.0 MB/minute Duration: 00:14:40 (00:14:32 idle/loading/preparing) 2/12/2008 6:21:25 PM: Execution incomplete. Total duration: 00:14:40 (00:14:32 idle/loading/preparing) Quit at 2/12/2008 6:21 PM [/log] They are running Mac OS X 10.3.9 on the Retrospect "server" and also backing up a G4 laptop that is 10.4. They are using a script that is backing up to a file archive with a matching catalog file on the network mounted drive. Oddly, they said that doing a get info on the SMB mounted drive gives "Format: unknown". I just mounted their drive on my desktop (Mac OS X 10.4.1) and got "Format: SMB (Other)". It's a 300G drive. I can also mount it afp, and then I get "Format: Appleshare". I'm using Samba 3.0.10 and Netatalk-2.0.3 on Solaris 9. So, it looks like they bought a slightly stale package of Retrospect. Am I correct in that assumption? And to update, I need to download the latest as well as the RDU? And, just to make sure ... this is not necessarily an SMB issue per se, and will not necessarily affect the office that is just bringing up Windows Retrospect? As I mentioned earlier, I believe all their PCs are XP. TIA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted February 13, 2008 Report Share Posted February 13, 2008 Quote: ... not quite like the old time Dantz responses to the retrospect users list. While some EMC employees (and before that, some Dantz employees) do participate here in their official capacity, this Forum is a primarily a user based community. The RetroTALK mailing list, which existed long before this browser based BBS, has always worked pretty much the same way, although Larry Zulch was known to post there occasionally, and folks such as Eric Ullman and the fabulous Irena Solomon provided regular contributions. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhwalker Posted February 14, 2008 Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 Quote: good cop, bad cop? um, makes me wonder which camp I'm in. Some on this list have called me a sociopath, but I'm just trying to be helpful, as is Dave. Quote: "Retrospect is an old code base"? That doesn't sound good. Is there work on updating it? Yea, it's basically the old MacOS 7/8/9 version 4.x, ported to MacOS via Rosetta with a few minor tweaks, which runs it emulated as PPC code. I believe that the problem is that it was written using CodeWarrior, which doesn't port easily to Apple's Xcode environment (needed for Universal Binary and current MacOS X API usage). Just a couple of weeks ago it was announced that a new version is in the works, based on the Windows code base version, which hopefully will be available late 2008, almost four years after Apple made the transition to Intel architecture. See: Retrospect X for Macintosh announcement It's my understanding that a new, rewritten (Universal Binary) Retrospect client may go into beta testing in a few weeks. For those of us who have been using Retrospect for over 15 years ever since the ASIP days, this is encouraging, if it's stable. Quote: So, it looks like they bought a slightly stale package of Retrospect. Am I correct in that assumption? And to update, I need to download the latest as well as the RDU? Well, from your log: Code: Retrospect version 6.1.126 launched at 2/12/2008 11:41 AM This indicates two things: (1) it is a somewhat old version; current version is 6.1.138. See Dave's post about SMB support in that version. Update (free) is here: Retrospect Mac updates (2) because no RDU version is announced on the line after the Retrospect version, there's no RDU running. Current RDU version is RDU 6.1.13.101. There have been some issues with the last few RDU versions for people with some DVD drives and some tape drives, but, for your configuration, I'd suggest starting with that RDU. If you have issues, you might try reverting back to RDU 6.1.11.101. The full RDU version history and links to downloads for each version are here: Mac Retrospect RDU version history Quote: And, just to make sure ... this is not necessarily an SMB issue per se, and will not necessarily affect the office that is just bringing up Windows Retrospect? As I mentioned earlier, I believe all their PCs are XP. Unclear what you are asking here. I don't have enough info to understand what you are asking. Is a Windows version of Retrospect (that does the backup itself, as contrasted to the client) being brought up in parallel, or just Windows Retrospect clients? Russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted February 14, 2008 Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 Missed post #106375, which went up while I was working on my response. IIRC, Retrospect 6.1.126 with no RDU does not support File Backup Sets larger then 2G on mounted volumes, which is the answer to your original question. I don't know if 6.1.138 adds the file size support natively or if an RDU is still required; what's new in 6.1.138 is the ability to auto-mount an SMB share without getting gibberish in the password configuration screen (which I have not tried yet). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhwalker Posted February 14, 2008 Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 Backup Set Size Limits (but the article is a few years old): http://kb.dantz.com/display/2n/index.asp?tab=browse&r=0.8594128 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choogendyk Posted February 14, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 I've downloaded 6.1.138 and it comes with the 6.1.13.101 RDU. Installed it on my desktop. Burned a CD and will take it up to them. I'll report back tomorrow, but that sounds like it should do the trick. As for the Windows office, they are running their own backups. Their own Windows copy of Retrospect, their own backup drive on my server, etc. They are totally Windows. I still haven't heard back from them, so I'll have to go over and check it out to see what's happening. I asked the side question originally because my other Mac shops are using afp instead of smb and are having no problems. So I was concerned that if it was an inherent smb problem, then the office using Windows might have a problem; and, unlike the group I'm working with now, they likely couldn't switch to afp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhwalker Posted February 14, 2008 Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 The SMB issue is in two places: (1) some NAS drives have odd versions of SMB; (2) some Macs have odd SMB versions. The recent SMB updates on the Mac side seem ok. There are serious problems on the AFP side when served by Windows. The standard Microsoft AFP services for Mac are bad; there are third-party solutions that are OK. If your Mac Retrospect (non-client, server) machine has, as its backup set destination, tape drives or DVD drives, you might want to put a copy of RDU 6.1.11.101 on that CD as well in case you need to revert to an earlier RDU. russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choogendyk Posted March 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2008 Sorry it's taken me a while to respond back. The faculty member does research on circadian rhythms and you never know when he will be in. Then he was out of town for a while. Anyway, the update worked. No more 2G limit. The only complaint I'm left with is that the vendor had such an old version in stock, but I can take that up with their sales rep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.