Tree Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 I recently upgraded from 8.0.733 to 8.1.148, both Console and Engine, and things looked fine - until I tried to run a script and discovered that NONE OF MY CATALOGS are accessible anymore. I am running both Engine and Console on my local machine, but had been keeping the Catalogs on a network share volume called "Backups". Now, if I go into Media Sets and try to LOCATE the catalog, all I get to see is my local Hard Drive; I have no way of accessing the shared volume. If I copy the catalog over to my local computer, then I can locate it, but that is not what I want to do - these are big files and need to stay resident on the big hard drive. If I click on LOCATE, then on my hard drive, and then scroll down, there is a folder named "Volumes" and I can click the disclosure triangle, but nothing happens, I don't get to see any other mounted volumes like I would expect. So what am I supposed to do to access all these existing catalogs? Do I have to either move/copy all catalogs to my local machine, or else install the Retrospect Engine on the server machine for which "Backups" is a local volume? Why did this work fine in 8.0 but now is broken in 8.1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Try adding the volume to Sources first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree Posted July 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 I managed to get my catalogs back - after I tried to add the Volume to Sources as mentioned. It told me that the volume was already present, but now when I click LOCATE I get to see my local hard drive plus "Backups-1", and I can locate the catalog under that. However... I left it in this state overnight to see if the scheduled scripts run as they should, and most of them did, however three are now stuck in a state of "Waiting for [media set name]" as their status, with the yellow triangle "!" icon. I've tried canceling ("Remove") the activity then re-running the script, but it just comes back to the same waiting status. Also, while it worked to locate the catalogs under "Backups-1" I really would rather see that they are under "Backups", as this means I must be dual-mounting the volume just in order to get the scripts to run. But I can find no way to locate the catalogs otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Try a verify script for the one that is failing. What happens when you run that script? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree Posted July 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 I was unable to run the Verify (I did think of that) at first - it just never did anything. But then I quit the Console, stopped the Engine, then restarted Engine and Console, and now am able to run the Verify's. Verify completes successfully... and now the script completes as well. So that means I'm back in business, but I still would like to know if there is a way to locate the catalogs such that they are not on "Backups-1" - I'm just scared that, should I unmount the volume or reboot or whatnot, I'll lose connection to the catalogs again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 The naming of mounted volumes is something that Mac OS X does, and that appears to interact with Retrospect in some situations. I have yet to come up with reproducible steps that will cause a failure, but enough folks have reported issues with "Foo Drive" vs. "Foo Drive-1" that I'm hoping EMC will document the expected behavior for us. It seems that running the Engine and Console on the same machine leads to different behavior in this regard, but as I said I've not been able to figure out exactly what/where/when. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 I don't really understand it yet either. I need to learn more before I can document it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHalliday Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 (edited) Hi, Same behaviour here: - in the release before 8.1, setting up new backups to a NAS device called 'backup_Duo01' actually identified the catalog location as '/Volumes/backupDuo01-2'. - there appears to be no way to edit this location other than creating new catalogue files - in 8.1, Retrospect will now fail to back up files: "+ Normal backup using Invoices to NAS at 7/7/2009 0:54 AM > Can't access Media Set Invoices Duo, error -1101 ( file/directory not found) 7/7/2009 0:54:41 AM: Execution incomplete" - Media sets show with a red 'x' next to them - However, if I locate the NAS in 'Sources' then run a script manually using one of the 'missing' catalogues, the backup will in fact run correctly. Part of the problem is it not being clear: - why the NAS has a different name in Retrospect from on the desktop - what the 'correct' behaviour with Retrosect should be - whether Retrospect should be able to back up to the NAS even if it is not mounted on the desktop - why it will suddenly all work again if the NAS is visible under 'Sources' (since, for the purposes of backing up TO the NAS, it is not a source...) Rob. (Should add, this is with Retrospect Desktop running under 10.5.7; will also note the seperate issue with Desktop which is that when it detects an updated version it downloads it but then tries to run it as a standard Retrospect setup rather than the Desktop setup, with all of the backups set up for that computer invisible; this happened with the .1 upgrade and also the previous upgrade. Downloading the Desktop version from the website runs correctly and restores the defined backups to view). Edited July 7, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Adding the NAS under sources is the same as mounting the NAS. It then becomes available as a destination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree Posted July 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Adding the NAS under sources is the same as mounting the NAS. It then becomes available as a destination. I think this may point to the problem. If adding a source is the same as mounting it, then a mounted volume should already show as a source. But the process of adding a source is somehow forcing the OS to mount it a second time (assuming you've got that volume mounted on your desktop) and thus appending the "-1" sequential number. If adding a source needs to be distinct from mounting (which I think it should be; I don't want scripts to fail because I've forgotten to mount a volume; in fact, I don't want to have to mount volumes at all if possible) then it should work in a different manner than mounting. I'm not sure what's possible, I'm not a code guy. I just think Retrospect should be able to access and address network shares without making the OS think that it is mounting them. That, or else go ahead and use the OS's mounting and accept that the shared volume mounted on the desktop is in fact the one that Retrospect will use, and anytime you run that script Retrospect will force that volume to mount. One or the other - it's this "same as" that is screwing things up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Part of the problem is it not being clear: - why the NAS has a different name in Retrospect from on the desktop Retrospect doesn't know about or care about your Desktop. The naming is all done by OS X. - what the 'correct' behaviour with Retrosect should be This is the question of the hour. - whether Retrospect should be able to back up to the NAS even if it is not mounted on the desktop Yes, of course it should, and it can. Robin asserted: > Adding the NAS under sources is the same as mounting the NAS. Did you intend to say: Adding the NAS under sources is the same as mounting the NAS (in the Finder) or (on the Desktop)? the process of adding a source is somehow forcing the OS to mount it a second time (assuming you've got that volume mounted on your desktop) and thus appending the "-1" sequential number. This is correct, although "forcing" is a bit extreme. OS X is happy to allow any process to mount a volume assuming the process has proper credentials to do so. All of this is easily observable with the "mount" shell command. When the Engine is run on the same machine as the Console, simply launching the Console application will mount any currently configured Source network volumes. This does not happen when the Engine is remote, in which case it takes additional action, such as clicking on a Browse button, to get the volume to mount on the remote Engine machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree Posted July 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 When the Engine is run on the same machine as the Console, simply launching the Console application will mount any currently configured Source network volumes. This does not happen when the Engine is remote, in which case it takes additional action, such as clicking on a Browse button, to get the volume to mount on the remote Engine machine. This was not my experience (to go back to my original post) - I had scripts that were set to use media sets that reside on a previously configured Source ("Backups" volume) but those scripts failed because that Source wasn't available. In other words, Retrospect did not mount the Source it needed. I had to add the Source again (and Retrospect told me that this particular Source was already defined, even if it wasn't currently available), then locate all the catalogs on "Backups-1". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHalliday Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) This is also - kind of - my experience. If the share is not mounted on the desktop, Restrospect will NOT back up to it. Log says: "+ Normal backup using Writing to NAS at 7/13/2009 0:51 AM > Can't access Media Set Writing Duo, error -1101 ( file/directory not found) 7/13/2009 0:51:49 AM: Execution incomplete" If the share IS mounted on the desktop, Retrospect will STILL not back up to it. Log says same thing. If I go into Sources, the share does appear but sometimes gives me an error when I try to browse it. There is some semi-random process that then happens here which I haven't quite pinned down, but at some point Retrospect will suddenly let me browse the NAS. As soon as I can do that, all backup scripts will run fine without having to locate or even 'touch' any of the Media Sets. I wish I knew what the 'semi-random' process was. The issue is, I'm sure, because Retrospect is looking for /Volumes/backup_Duo01-2/Quicksilver Backup/Retrospect Backup/backupname rather than /Volumes/backup_Duo01/Quicksilver Backup/Retrospect Backup/backupname Is there any way to force Retrospect to redefine the NAS it is looking for, other than to throw all of the backups away and start again which would, obviously, be a little tedious....? Thanks, Rob. Edited July 13, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHalliday Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 OK, just added another share on the same NAS. I'm guessing the issue is that the old (problematic) one shows up as 'Machine: Macname' in Retrospect's Sources list, whereas the new one shows up as 'Machine: IP address of the NAS.' Still don't know how to change this without having to start all of the backups from scratch..... Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHalliday Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) And futher to all of that: - unmount the volume from the Mac desktop - add it to Retrospect's 'Sources' - now it appears as /Volumes/backup_Duo01-4/ on machine IP Address of NAS suggesting something is not tidying up after itself. Re-starting the Mac, NOT 'hand mounting' the NAS, then doing the same thing in Retrospect this time adds it as: /Volumes/backup_Duo01-1/ but of course Retrospect still won't back up as the scripts are looking for /Volumes/backup_Duo01-2/ I would expect Media Sets > Locate to let me adjust each media set to look in the right place. This does work but won't let me get at /Duo01 rather than /Duo01-1. If I then mount the NAS on the Mac desktop, backups run fine - presumably because Retrospect does now find something called /Volumes/backup_Duo01-2/ even though I don't see that name on the Mac desktop (this is presumably also the 'mystery step' that's been happening in my other fumbling around, as per my earlier post). ('Mount' in the terminal confirms this, listing: afp_35BlwA35BlwA35BlwA35BlwA-2.2d000004 on /Volumes/backup_Duo01 (afpfs) afp_35BlwA35BlwA35BlwA35BlwA-2.2d000005 on /Volumes/backup_Duo01-1 (afpfs) afp_35BlwA35BlwA35BlwA35BlwA-2.2d000006 on /Volumes/backup_Duo01-2 (afpfs, nodev, nosuid, mounted by rob) though I don't understand why there are three entries here rather than just two... unless one is Retrospect mounting the device to store to, one was it mounting it when I added it as a source, and the third is me adding it via the Mac's Finder.) It seems to me that there really needs to be better handling of this from Retrospect's end, a better UI to show what is going on, and some way of dealing with the problem, particularly for the 'single machine' version of Retrospect.... It also seems to me that I need to be able to set /backup_Duo01 as the volume for the Catalog file, since that way Retrospect would backup even if I hadn't mounted the drive in the Finder. That is what I don't seem to be able to do: I can only get (at best) /backup_Duo01-1. Rob. Edited July 13, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHalliday Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 So, more messing around and a new issue: - remove the NAS from 'sources' - restart the Mac - confirm (using Mount in terminal) that the NAS is not mounted - Run Retrospect - confirm (using Mount in terminal) that one share isadded - backup_Duo01 - add a completely new Media Set (Add>Choose>Add Share... etc) - this appears - correctly - as being on /Volumes/backup_Duo01 So far so good. Now use LOCATE with an existing media set to try to tell it to look in /Volumes/backup_Duo01 rather than Duo01-1 or Duo01-2 etc. I can select the catalogue file - but the 'Catalog' shown in the Media Sets status screen DOES NOT CHANGE - ie. it remains as /backup_Duo01-1, or /backup_Duo01-2 or whatever. This suggests - to me - that some parts of Retrospect are referencing the NAS using its share name as it appears in the Finder/on the desktop (backup_Duo01) while other parts are referencing the NAS using it's 'unix' volume name (backup_Duo01, backup_Duo01-1, backup_Duo01-2 or whatever). That would also explain why in the past I have sometimes seen Retrospect say that the volume was already mounted yet would not write backup data to it. A solution or workaround to this - even if only being able to directly edit the text for 'Catalog' in the Media Sets Summary view - would be most welcome. Thanks, Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHalliday Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 OK, so from another thread, REBUILD seems to do the trick. This really needs to be made better, though, imho.... Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfauland Posted September 16, 2009 Report Share Posted September 16, 2009 Very interesting discussion here. I had/have all these problems myself. I still ask myself, how it's possible to buy a commercial, professional software, that is supposed to do "nothing more" than just backup files from a choice of SOURCES to a choice of DESTINATIONS and not succeeding to do so ?? I am now spending at least two hours a day since more than a week in order to get the thing running ... If I would be invited to test "Retrospect 10.0" as a beta-tester, I can decide if I have time and interest to do so. I really don't want to grump around here, but I am in urgent need of a reliable and safe backup, and - at least right now - with version 8 for Mac I don't get it ! 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.