brising Posted July 21, 2003 Report Share Posted July 21, 2003 Retrospect Workgroup server did something strange today - it ran a backup of a client 3 times in quick succession, although the backup server is supposed to backup just once per 24 hours. The client was backed up at 12:04, 13:43, and again at 14:35. The first backup ran normally (for 5.0) listing only the 'usual' 560 errors due to Mac files on a Windows computer (the .dat bug). The second backup had an additional error about not being able to find drive E:. The last backup was back to normal. Server: Retrospect 5.0.238 on Mac OS X 10.2.6 backing up to VXA-1 firewire drive. Client: Retrospect 6.0.110 on Win 2000 Professional on an IBM Thinkpad which was not detached at any time. Other oddness for the day: Power outage as Retrospect was backing up the above-mentioned laptop at 11:14. [The newly-purchased UPS was the cause of the outage. Wonderful.] I understand the repeat backup, since there would be problems with the sudden power outage. Why would there be 2 more backups after the power and all were just fine? TIA (once meant Thanks In Advance, but now has darker connotations), Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowspawn Posted July 22, 2003 Report Share Posted July 22, 2003 What client backup settings are you using? I had something similar happen in the weekend. In my case the particular client was set to back up "selected volumes" and one of them was unavailable. So I guess Retrospect was (reasonably) treating the overall backup as a failure, and trying the client again. (Your second "extra" backup failed to find drive "E:" which sounds a similar situation.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brising Posted July 22, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2003 It's set to backup the client desktop. It makes sense that Retrospect would be bothered by the missing E: drive, but I'm not sure why the second backup even happened. Perhaps the first one was looking for information from before the power failure, and hence marked itself as bad, then the second backup missed drive E:, and marked itself as bad. Sounds like a reasonable explanation, even if it is rather mysterious. Thanks for the tip. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.