Hi Ken,

The members of this list who are suggesting that your 519 errors are due to
something other than a problem with Retrospect are not doing so because they
"blindly follow the dogma that Retrospect is perfect," it's because they
have found it themselves to be true...for some of them, even after being
*certain* that there was a problem with Retrospect.

One particular user that comes to mind, Travis Morgan, had complained of 519
errors for months. Because nothing else was giving him problems, he was
fairly certain that the problem was a bug in Retrospect. Well, here's what
he finally discovered (quoted from his Nov 5, 1999 post):

>   Turns out that Virex 5.9.1 (and Virex 6.0) tries to scan the MRJ
> 2.x (Macintosh Runtime for Java) files when the backups are occurring
> so the Retrospect backup has to wait while the machine is done
> scanning those files. The reason for the long delay is because the
> MRJ files are compressed and I have Virex to scan compressed files.
> After turning off "Scan Compressed files" on my problematic machines,
> I haven't seen a 519 error ever since. WAHOOOO!

Reliable means one thing, Ken--you can restore with confidence. Network
communication errors limit Retrospect's reliability (that's why it reports
the error and moves on to the next task). Sure, Retrospect isn't a
diagnostic tool, but it is a canary in a coal mine; it will find problems
that don't show up otherwise. Nevertheless, those problems are every bit
real, and you will need to track them down and eliminate them to guarantee
the reliability of your backups.

Please read and follow our Tech Note on troubleshooting 519 errors.
<http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=tn415> If you need help with any of
the procedures, please contact our tech support department. (925.253.3050)

I know these errors can be difficult to track down--I've done it myself. So
hang in there, call us if you need to, and have a little faith in what we're
telling you.

Best regards,

Eric Ullman
Dantz Development

Ken Gillett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Retrospect is NOT a network diagnostic tool. If it was then it should
> at least tell me where the fault lies, not just report some nebulous
> 'network communication error'.
> How can you say that when I am reporting that it is the ONLY network
> product that fails to complete the task for which it is expressly
> designed to do? Maybe you have a different understanding of the word
> "reliable".
> Look, I don't want to bash Dantz here, but these responses show that
> some users just blindly follow the dogma that Retrospect is perfect
> and the fault lies elsewhere. Well I'm sorry, but if I bought a car
> and the wheels kept falling off and the manufacturer insisted it was
> not their fault, it was the road surface, yet although the road was a
> bit rough, no other cars were losing their wheels, I'd say that the
> fault lies with the manufacturer who should to look at how they could
> stop the wheels falling off their car even on bumpy roads.
> It would also appear that I'm not the only one whose wheels keep falling
> off...

To subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:        <http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Reply via email to