catman Posted February 27, 2003 Report Share Posted February 27, 2003 We run Retrospect server on an os 9 mac that is setup to daily, incrementally (new or modified files) backup Work-in-Proress folder on about 25 partitions on 2 os x servers. It works flawlessly. We run the same software with the same script setup from an os x server 10.1.5. Each partition has about 20gigs of data. I run thru about ten 40gb tapes to get thru the first archive (takes about a week) and then when I relaunch it starts at the 1st partition and selects almost, if not all of the data. The other retrospect only selects about 1 gig, the amount of new or modified work since the script was begun. Do I need to upgrade to 10.2? Any suggestions to try? --catman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcswgn Posted February 27, 2003 Report Share Posted February 27, 2003 Retrospect on the OS X server must think the files have changed. Look at the info for a file in one of the snapshots that you feel should not be getting backed up and compare to the info for the file on disk. That might give you a clue as to why retrospect thinks it has changed. It is sufficient to have the modification time change to trigger a new backup. There have been threads about even changing the timezone on the client making retrospect think the modification times have changed. You can get information on a file in a backup set by going to the Reports tab, selecting Contents, then the backup set, the snapshot, the file, and then Get Info. I don't know if this is the most complete information available on a file. AmyC has posted something in the past on getting file info and I don't remember if it was in the same place or somewhere different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catman Posted March 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2003 The files haven't changed. All have identical dates/times to the items archived the day before. I'm adding a new post about the need for "client" software, wondering if it matters. catman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted March 6, 2003 Report Share Posted March 6, 2003 Quote: We run Retrospect server on an os 9 mac that is setup to daily, incrementally (new or modified files) backup Work-in-Proress folder on about 25 partitions on 2 os x servers. It works flawlessly. We run the same software with the same script setup from an os x server 10.1.5. You neglected to describe your setup, leading readers here to assume that you were using the Client software to access network machines. Yes, you need to update to 10.2. There is a bug in 10.1.5 where the date of files provided by the OS to Retrospect can differ by a second each time an AFP server volume is mounted. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syzygies Posted March 9, 2003 Report Share Posted March 9, 2003 The easiest way to get Retro to copy too many files under OS X is to change time zones. Try this: Script a tiny backup, folder-as-subvolume to file. Run it, change your time zone east an hour, and run it again. Check the log; every file is copied again. This hurts when it ruins a file backup of one's entire system, by irreversibly doubling it in size. It makes Retro unsuitable for a traveling laptop. If you think this should be fixed, contact Retro tech support. I'm not sure what the point is of discussing this here; we're just making noise in the crying room at church. Does Dantz even read these pages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted March 9, 2003 Report Share Posted March 9, 2003 Quote: This hurts when it ruins a file backup of one's entire system, by irreversibly doubling it in size. It makes Retro unsuitable for a traveling laptop. Unsuitable? Balderdash! Yes it's a drag that Retrospect's file matching is "fooled" by changing time zones. But it's so easy to change time zines in OS X you could easily create a "backup" time zone, or just change back to your home base time zone, before running your local backups. >Does Dantz even read these pages Do you? Even a casual visitor here would recognize Myoff and AmyC as Dantz employees, who answer questions, take suggestions and even admit to problems! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.