joelande Posted March 28, 2009 Report Share Posted March 28, 2009 I was under the impression would allow multiple sources to backed up at once. Why do I only see each source backed up one at a time? Do I have to create a separate script for each thread? Or a separate destination? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted March 28, 2009 Report Share Posted March 28, 2009 1) Desktop edition only supports a single thread 2) A single backup script can only run a single operation at a time. You must have different scripts with a different destination media set for each thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelande Posted March 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2009 Yes I have multi server license. I will create multiple scripts and targets then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelande Posted March 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 Can you also clarify the behavior I am currently seeing - Right now I have manually started three scripts: Two scripts are running: Script One is backing up Server A Script Two is backing up Server B Script Three script is waiting. It is configured to backup a number of folders, on a number of servers, including one on Server A. To me it shouldn't be waiting. There are three other servers in the Script Three that could be backed up. The two servers that are actively backing up aren't even the first server listed in Script Three as a source. In fact the waiting script states it is waiting for "Server C", which isn't even doing anything right now. Do I have to make an individual script for each and every folder I want to backup just to ensure optimal efficiency? This seems like a ridiculous pain in the neck, considering the rather clumsy interface for selecting sources. What do I have to do to ensure that as many threads are running at once as possible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted March 29, 2009 Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 Because one of the sources is already in use, the 3rd script can not run until the source becomes available. This expected behavior and it works like this on Windows. If you don't want it to wait, then use a proactive backup script which will change the source order if needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelande Posted March 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 Just because any one source is being used? Even though other servers are available for backing up, just sitting idle? Seems extremely limiting. So instead of organizing my scripts by type of data, I suppose I could organize them by physical server... But this results in data backups being organized in a less than optimal way, and prioritization being uncontrollable. Kinda sucks. For example I have four servers that each have staff and student data on them. I would like to prioritize the staff data, so it is backed up first, and keep the staff data and student data in separate media sets. But in order to optimize the backup window, I have to keep backups grouped by physical server, so that servers that would be sitting idle can be backed up with an available thread. This should be improved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted March 29, 2009 Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 It has worked like this for many years. You have a simple solution. Use a proactive backup script. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelande Posted March 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 (edited) Yes it is how it has always been - but I have been looking for better solutions (and isn't v8 a re-write from the ground up?). I was moving away from Retrospect, but thought I would try v8 out first. I tested BRU, and am also looking at aTempo and BakBone. I am still waiting for my first Retrospect v8 backup to finish. I will post comparisons when done. My understanding in the proactive is that it is designed for laptops, so that it does the oldest backup first. This isn't the type of "control" I am looking for. Perhaps I am wrong regarding proactive backups. I would do more research, but there is no manual for v8 yet. Edited March 29, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelande Posted March 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 Oh, not to mention regarding "worked like this for many years". Yeah, that's because the software existed without any real update for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 regarding "worked like this for many years". ...that's because the software existed without any real update for years. Untrue, since Retrospect for Macintosh has never had multiple threads before. Robin is speaking of how the Windows product has worked for many years; a product that has seen many updates. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelande Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) And I would know how the Windows product has worked for years, how? We are in the Mac forum here after all. Edited March 30, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 The confusion is my fault, in a prior post I made reference to the Windows version working this way and my train of thought was assuming a connection to the prior post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelande Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) It looks like you not only have to have each server in an individual script, you also have to have a separate destination available for each separate thread. What a management nightmare. The software should take care of this kind of stuff. I wish the documentation was done, so I didn't have to learn by experimentation. Edited March 30, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 You can view the Retrospect 7.6 documentation. The basic concepts are the same for multiple executions. It looks like you not only have to have each server in an individual script, you also have to have a separate destination available for each separate thread. Yes, I noted that in one of my first posts. You must have different scripts with a different destination media set for each thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.