Retrospect 8.1 cannot read Backup Sets from versions 6.x ?

[MacWright]

I hope that I'm just not reading this correctly.

 

"Retrospect 8.1 cannot import configurations or read Backup Sets from versions 6.x or earlier. " (this is from the knowledgebase)

 

Does this mean that 8.1 cannot read a backup set from 6.x? How would I retrieve data from older tape backups?

 

-- after reading further, apparently I would need to keep an older version of Retrospect to retrieve from older tapes!! really? Retrospect currently runs on Rosetta, in 5 years will it be supported? Will 6.x still be able to access hardware on newer boxes? I doubt it. This doesn't make sense for a backup software? I still hope that I'm just missing something in the interpretation.

 

thx

Edited November 12, 2009 by Guest

[rhwalker]

Yep, you are reading correctly.

 

This is exactly the issue that prevents us from migrating (well, along with the lack of scripting to coordinate shutdown/checkpointing/restart/backup of services on our server).

 

Isn't it amazing that people would expect that a backup program should be able to restore older backups? I mean, to me, that's the only purpose of a backup program. We have Retrospect tapes back to version 2.0 (1993), and we will always need to access that data.

 

Russ

[MacWright]

Thanks for the response.

 

I have to admit that after reading the info, I spent some time looking at other backup options. Being stuck with inaccessible, proprietary formatted files/tapes is not where I thought I'd find my backup plan. I'm not sure what I will do, but it does warrant some out of box considerations.

 

thx. j

[rhwalker]

Well, it has been announced that support for Retrospect 6 backups is coming. That really doesn't help me with tapes back to Retrospect 2.0.

 

To me, it's a vendor commitment issue to businesses who bought in to the program.

 

Read the marketing blurb announcement for Retrospect 8:

New! EMC Retrospect for Mac 8

 

With more than two decades of field-tested expertise and millions of users worldwide, EMC Retrospect is the most trusted name in Mac backup.

 

Whether you are protecting photos of your company picnic or your business financial data, Retrospect 8 for the Mac will give you the peace of mind knowing your critical files are backed-up and secure.

Indeed. There are those who say that anyone who believes anything from marketing types deserves what they get.

 

If there won't be support for reading older backups (heck, even if an add-on has to be purchased - I don't care) all the way back, then it's a new evaluation of backup options, and Retrospect starts out with a strike against it - no commitment to read older backups.

 

It's bad enough that the backup set format changes with each release so that old backups have to have their catalogs rebuilt, but I can accept that. But there has to be a bridge from the past to the present and future. Running emulated PowerPC Carbon code under Rosetta is not that bridge, because Apple keeps dropping support for older technologies.

 

Russ

[MacWright]

Hi Russ

 

>Well, it has been announced that support for Retrospect 6 backups is coming.

 

Was this an "official" announcement? I couldn't find it on the website. I probably just overlooked it.

 

thx again.

[rhwalker]

>Well, it has been announced that support for Retrospect 6 backups is coming.

 

Was this an "official" announcement? I couldn't find it on the website. I probably just overlooked it.

Yes, I'll find it and post a link.

 

Russ

[MacWright]

Hi Russ

 

>Yes, I'll find it and post a link.

 

no worries, I'll take your word for it. I appreciate hearing that there is hope.

 

 

regards, j

[rhwalker]

Here are links:

 

Working on adding older backup capability for future

 

Planned update to read older backup sets

 

Ullman post re backward compatibility

 

Mayoff post re plans to add 6.1 support

 

Mayoff post re plan to support 6.1 but not test for earlier support - who knows?

 

Ullman post - being able to restore from older backups is important

 

Ullman reiterates that it is important to be able to restore from older backups

 

I think you can get the sense of what will happen by reading these posts.

 

Russ

[MacWright]

you are very efficient!

 

I think my plan will be to wait until the translation tools become real and in the meanwhile use 6.

 

thanks again,

 

j

 

 

[rhwalker]

you are very efficient!

Well, a better way to phrase it is that this is my hot button issue. Different things matter to different people.

 

I would be perfectly happy with a command line only interface, no GUI. But it needs to be:

 

(1) reliable

(2) able to read older backups

 

no need to be scriptable if the interface is CLI.

no need to be scheduled if the interface is CLI.

 

Russ

[GMRMacBackup]

A question I have for anyone else viewing this thread, with the planned obsolescence of certain tape drives not being able to read tapes from a series three generations back (LTO4 systems cannot read LTO1 tapes), which is better? Maintain a legacy piece of hardware or transcribe the data to fresh media after each generation? Maintaining the old hardware is expensive as it not only involves the tape library but sometimes the computer hardware and operating systems that can still run the legacy backup software (ie. Retro 6). I know this isn't just a Retro issue, we are pretty much at the whim of the hardware manufacturers to maintain backwards compatibility.

[rhwalker]

It's more than just the issues you mention.

 

Tape has a certain shelf life, and becomes brittle with age. If you are really concerned with moving forward with your backup data, you periodically need to migrate the storage technology forward, too.

 

We have a closet with old hardware just so that we can read old backups. It's no longer possible to connect some of those old computers to a network with modern Macs (you cannot connect to a modern Mac fileserver from a 68K Mac, for example).

 

When we moved forward from Apple II to Mac AppleShare fileservers, we had a massive conversion project to take all of our 5.25 inch Apple II floppies, transfer them to 1.44 MB 3.25 inch dual-sided floppies, take them to a PPC with a floppy drive, save all of the files onto our AppleShare server, back that up using Retrospect (2.0, then 4.2), then transfer all those files over to Mac OS X when that arrived. The problem is not so much having the data, but having the technology to read the data (AppleWorks Apple II files, Apple II Word Perfect files, Mac OS Classic WordPerfect files, FileMaker Pro databases, all the versions of Microsoft Word files, etc.), and we have tested that technology at each migration step, too. And it's more than just an issue of reading the data - it's also an issue of reproducing the data as it was: pagination, linebreaks, fonts, etc.

 

Many people, who are only concerned with preserving the data in the same manner as if paper copies were preserved, rely on scanned images or Adobe PDF format, but those technologies can become obsolete and orphaned, too. There's also the issue of whether the data is searchable for specific words, etc., and whether it can be imported for modification / inclusion in a later document.

 

It's not a simple problem.

 

Russ

[MacWright]

Hi,

 

Good question. I just looked at the Sony AIT page and found-

 

"Sony Electronics Inc. will discontinue offering AIT drives and AIT library/automation systems - March 2010."

 

Which are going to be the last tape drives standing when this is all done? What is the best of the bunch moving forward... hard drives?

 

anybody with a good crystal ball out there?

 

I like the idea of open source file formats for backup but the hardware is a different story.

 

thx

 

 

 

Edited November 16, 2009 by Guest

[rhwalker]

I like the idea of open source file formats for backup but the hardware is a different story.

Well, that's just not possible with Retrospect, which is necessarily proprietary in backup set format because of the patented snapshot paradigm.

 

Note, however, that the original Zulch patent on which Retrospect is based lapses in January 2010, because that will be 20 years from its priority filing date in the U.S.: Zulch, U.S. Patent 5,150,473 (filed January 16, 1990; issued Sept. 22, 1992). See 35 U.S.C. 154(a)(2) (as amended).

 

Russ

[MacWright]

>Well, that's just not possible with Retrospect,

 

No but I'd be more inclined to move to 8 if it was. Unfortunately I don't see any Open Source options unless I want to move to Linux Backup Server.

 

Does the new v8 format restart the patent clock?

[rhwalker]

No, the patent's claims are what they are, and simply changing byte-swap order is an obvious modification, not independently patentable. Of course, there is no public documentation of the backup set format. It's a trade secret, and a formidable reverse engineering problem.

 

For us, we would prefer a supported reliable product from EMC, able to read older backups, and we are willing to pay for that. Your choices may be different.

 

Russ

[MacWright]

>For us, we would prefer a supported reliable product from EMC

 

I agree, Retrospect has been a solid performer for many many years. And I can't remember any time when it's let me down. Hardware is a different story. But if they announced that the format was open source it wouldn't be a bad thing.

 

regards.

[rhwalker]

But if they announced that the format was open source it wouldn't be a bad thing.

Right now, I'd be happy if they threw whatever exists for the User Guide onto a public Wiki and let the users finish/maintain it. Eric Ullman's note to the retro-talk-request email list on August 21, 2009 (over 12 weeks ago) indicated that it was "getting close", and was expected about September 21, 2009, with chapters being edited the weekend of August 21.

 

Russ

[GMRMacBackup]

I agree, post what is available and let us have some sort of handbook to cover Retro 8's abilities and processes. I don't care if I have to click through a disclaimer page saying that the information presented is a work in progress, having something to reference is much better than winging it alone. I know the operations of the program will change, that's one of the greatest advantages of having a wiki online, it can be constantly updated and maintain a connection with feature updates as they are implemented.

[Tree]

I study the posts on this forum, treating it as if it is the "User Guide Wiki" you speak about. I'm eager to see what comes of the "read from older backup sets" issue, though for me I doubt there will be any real option. I ran 5.1 right up until adopting 8, not fixing what ain't broke, as it were, and if 8's never going to read from 5 then I shouldn't be too angst-y. I knew it was a clean break back when I first installed 8, and that I'd need to hang onto my 5.1 and 6 licenses (we took advantage of the early adopter deal to purchase a 6 license and get 8 free when it arrived). I figure, if worse comes to worse, I'll make use of my 6 license to retrieve data on the 5 sets, possibly converting them to 6 sets which 8 can (in the near future) utilize.

 

Incidentally, one of the main reason we stuck with 5.1 was that, until a couple of years ago, we still had a few OS 9 machines in the office, and needed its client. Ah the joys of obsolescence.

[rhwalker]

11-16-09 05:12 PM - Post#131425

In response to GMR Mac Backup

 

I study the posts on this forum, treating it as if it is the "User Guide Wiki" you speak about.

Ah, the folklore approach to documentation.

 

I figure, if worse comes to worse, I'll make use of my 6 license to retrieve data on the 5 sets, possibly converting them to 6 sets which 8 can (in the near future) utilize.

Well, it has been reported in these forums that, at some point subsequent to the release of Retrospect 6.0, Retrospect 6.x lost the ability to read backup sets made by older versions of the program.

 

See the following thread, and especially the third post in the thread, reporting what the original poster was told by EMC Retrospect support:

Backup Tapes made with Retrospect 4.x cannot be read by Retrospect 6.1.x

 

I know that it worked at the release of 6.0 because I tested it. I would have to recable our server to add back our old DDS2 DAT drive to test our Retrospect 2.0, 4.2, etc., backup sets with Retrospect 6.1.230.

 

Incidentally, one of the main reason we stuck with 5.1 was that, until a couple of years ago, we still had a few OS 9 machines in the office, and needed its client.

Retrospect 6.1.230 can back up and restore an OS 9 machine, as can Retrospect 6.0 through 6.1.230. Client 5.1.180 (May 10, 2006), although it has a bug and doesn't report its version correctly (only reports 5.1, not 5.1.180). What a support nightmare.

 

Russ