ETA? On software? Ha ha ha! That's funny, Ben! You crack me up, man...

;-)

Sorry. Couldn't help myself. I could say early Q2, 2001, but we _are_
talking about backup software here. That means that any bug that causes data
loss is unacceptable. So, whenever coding and testing is complete. Still,
that's my best guess.

Eric Ullman
Dantz Development


Ben Eastwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> AHHH HA! Thanks Eric, that explains alot... the folder I backed up had well
> over 300K files and the memory usage was pretty high during some portions
> of the process. Thanks for the workaround. Any ETA on the fix?
> 
> 
> Eric Ullman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Doug is correct, though the limit is somewhere closer to 300,000 files.
> Retrospect for Windows 5.15 (and earlier) has an unexpected memory usage
> limitation (i.e., a bug) that prevents it from successfully scanning a
> volume containing more than 300K files. In such a case, Retrospect will
> respond with Error 625 (Not enough memory).
> 
> This problem has been identified and will be fixed in the next release.
> 
> In the meantime, the workaround is to have Retrospect backup that volume as
> two or more subvolumes (outlined on pages 164-165 of the Retrospect User's
> Guide).



--
----------------------------------------------------------
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