Pam Lefkowitz wrote:
> Incrementals using Retrospect are handled *very* differently than other
> backup software implementations. What were you hoping for/expecting them to
> be and what kinds of problems were you having?
>
> I'd be happy to work with you on this off-list with a summary to the list if
> you'd like.
>
> Pam
>
Pam,
Thanks for your offer. I will give it another chance first. And to appease those who
might think that there is an expectation based from other backup software, Retrospect
is
the only software I have experience with and encounters with other software have
produced a very negative reaction. I like Retrospect for ease of use. Simple,
expedient, what more can I say? But after I hooked up a DDS-4 tape unit and I tried to
run RS in "normal" backup mode (incremental), I would come in the morning to find
numerous errors on the screen and no backup. And after having lost drives (this has
happened 2 times) within days of having no backup I will not tolerate more than 1 day
w/o a complete backup. I gave up and went to a single script that uses a different tape
each day, completely replacing the contents, along with a monthly archive backup. Now
this was about two years ago. And yes, I too, have several large FMP files that need
backup.
My expectations for an incremental backup are as have been described in other posts on
this list, that is, one initial complete backup followed by backup of only files that
have changed. Makes complete sense to me. I'll give it another shot.
--
Craig Gaevert, A.I.A.
Architect
TLCD Architecture
Santa Rosa, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
----------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives: <http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/retro-talk%40latchkey.com/>
For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.
