Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-08-05 Thread Vetch
Hi Matthias,
Sorry it took me so long to get back to you - I've had a lot of tight
deadlines.
I'm not backing up a windows client... It's a Linux server offering a samba
share.
To be fair, thinking about it, since I'm using rsync, it's just a Linux
server, and the fact that I access it with Windows clients is irrelevant.
No VSS - because Linux...
Good news on the backup front...
Still, very strange about the different numbers of files reported on Windows
when looking at the share, but I guess that's one of those strange glitchy
things with MS products...
I think pretty much the only thing I backup is the /home, /etc, /usr and
/var...
Thanks for your help on this...
Cheers,
Jx

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Matthias Meyer matthias.me...@gmx.liwrote:

 Vetch wrote:

  Hi Matthias,
  All my xferlogs say they have 0 errors (apart from one, but that was
 after
  the problem occurred anyway)...
  I've had a look at them, but they are... quite long...
  Without knowing what to search for, I'm not sure what I can do with
  them... If they report no errors, I guess I can assume all files are
  backing up properly?
  Xfer Error Summary
 
 
  Backup# Type View #Xfer errs #bad files #bad share #tar errs
  0 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  28 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  56 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  84 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  112 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  126 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  133 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  140 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  147 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  150 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  151 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  152 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  153 full XferLOG, Errors 1 0 0 0
  154 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  155 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
  156 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 
  Thanks,
  Jx

 That is unbelievable.
 You backup a windows client, right?
 There should be a lot of files which can not be backuped because they are
 in
 use.
 Do you use volume shadow copies in windows?

 But nevertheless, you have backups of all files specified in your
 configuration.
 If you check your backup include/exclude configuration you should find
 which
 files are not backuped.

 br
 Matthias
 --
 Don't Panic



 --
 Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
 trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus
 on
 what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
 Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
 ___
 BackupPC-users mailing list
 BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
 List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
 Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
 Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-08-05 Thread Vetch
Hi Jeffrey,
Sounds doable, but as I say, I'm backing a Linux server, not a Win client,
so I don't think I need to worry too much about the busy files...
Thanks for the suggestion though...
Cheers,
Jx

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
backu...@kosowsky.orgwrote:

 Matthias Meyer wrote at about 21:00:54 +0200 on Thursday, July 30, 2009:
   Vetch wrote:
  
Hi Matthias,
All my xferlogs say they have 0 errors (apart from one, but that was
 after
the problem occurred anyway)...
I've had a look at them, but they are... quite long...
Without knowing what to search for, I'm not sure what I can do with
them... If they report no errors, I guess I can assume all files are
backing up properly?
Xfer Error Summary
   
   
Backup# Type View #Xfer errs #bad files #bad share #tar errs
0 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
28 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
56 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
84 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
112 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
126 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
133 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
140 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
147 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
150 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
151 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
152 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
153 full XferLOG, Errors 1 0 0 0
154 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
155 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
156 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   
Thanks,
Jx
  
   That is unbelievable.
   You backup a windows client, right?
   There should be a lot of files which can not be backuped because they
 are in
   use.
   Do you use volume shadow copies in windows?

 Alternatively, you could just exclude the files that tend to be
 busy. Before I wrote my volume shadow copy script, I had a short list
 of excludes that eliminated all busy files.

  
   But nevertheless, you have backups of all files specified in your
   configuration.
   If you check your backup include/exclude configuration you should find
 which
   files are not backuped.
  
   br
   Matthias
   --
   Don't Panic
  
  
  
 --
   Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008
 30-Day
   trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and
 focus on
   what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
   Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
   ___
   BackupPC-users mailing list
   BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
   List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
   Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
   Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
  


 --
 Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
 trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus
 on
 what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
 Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
 ___
 BackupPC-users mailing list
 BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
 List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
 Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
 Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-30 Thread Matthias Meyer
Vetch wrote:

 Hi Matthias,
 All my xferlogs say they have 0 errors (apart from one, but that was after
 the problem occurred anyway)...
 I've had a look at them, but they are... quite long...
 Without knowing what to search for, I'm not sure what I can do with
 them... If they report no errors, I guess I can assume all files are
 backing up properly?
 Xfer Error Summary
 
 
 Backup# Type View #Xfer errs #bad files #bad share #tar errs
 0 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 28 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 56 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 84 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 112 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 126 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 133 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 140 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 147 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 150 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 151 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 152 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 153 full XferLOG, Errors 1 0 0 0
 154 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 155 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 156 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
 
 Thanks,
 Jx

That is unbelievable.
You backup a windows client, right?
There should be a lot of files which can not be backuped because they are in
use.
Do you use volume shadow copies in windows?

But nevertheless, you have backups of all files specified in your
configuration.
If you check your backup include/exclude configuration you should find which
files are not backuped.

br
Matthias
-- 
Don't Panic


--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-30 Thread Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
Matthias Meyer wrote at about 21:00:54 +0200 on Thursday, July 30, 2009:
  Vetch wrote:
  
   Hi Matthias,
   All my xferlogs say they have 0 errors (apart from one, but that was after
   the problem occurred anyway)...
   I've had a look at them, but they are... quite long...
   Without knowing what to search for, I'm not sure what I can do with
   them... If they report no errors, I guess I can assume all files are
   backing up properly?
   Xfer Error Summary
   
   
   Backup# Type View #Xfer errs #bad files #bad share #tar errs
   0 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   28 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   56 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   84 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   112 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   126 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   133 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   140 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   147 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   150 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   151 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   152 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   153 full XferLOG, Errors 1 0 0 0
   154 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   155 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   156 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
   
   Thanks,
   Jx
  
  That is unbelievable.
  You backup a windows client, right?
  There should be a lot of files which can not be backuped because they are in
  use.
  Do you use volume shadow copies in windows?

Alternatively, you could just exclude the files that tend to be
busy. Before I wrote my volume shadow copy script, I had a short list
of excludes that eliminated all busy files.

  
  But nevertheless, you have backups of all files specified in your
  configuration.
  If you check your backup include/exclude configuration you should find which
  files are not backuped.
  
  br
  Matthias
  -- 
  Don't Panic
  
  
  --
  Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
  trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus 
  on 
  what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
  Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
  ___
  BackupPC-users mailing list
  BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
  List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
  Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
  Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
  

--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-24 Thread Matthias Meyer
You should check the backup log file XferLOG.
Each file which can not backup will be logged theire, including the reason.

br
Matthias
-- 
Don't Panic


--
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-24 Thread Vetch
Hi Matthias,
All my xferlogs say they have 0 errors (apart from one, but that was after
the problem occurred anyway)...
I've had a look at them, but they are... quite long...
Without knowing what to search for, I'm not sure what I can do with them...
If they report no errors, I guess I can assume all files are backing up
properly?
Xfer Error Summary


Backup# Type View #Xfer errs #bad files #bad share #tar errs
0 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
28 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
56 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
84 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
112 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
126 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
133 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
140 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
147 full XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
150 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
151 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
152 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
153 full XferLOG, Errors 1 0 0 0
154 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
155 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0
156 incr XferLOG, Errors 0 0 0 0

Thanks,
Jx
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Matthias Meyer matthias.me...@gmx.liwrote:

 You should check the backup log file XferLOG.
 Each file which can not backup will be logged theire, including the reason.

 br
 Matthias
 --
 Don't Panic



 --
 ___
 BackupPC-users mailing list
 BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
 List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
 Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
 Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

--
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-21 Thread Matthias Meyer
Vetch wrote:

 
 Ok - I tried direct restores back into the original directories over the
 network - and it came up with successful restores for all the home
 directories...
 Does this mean that the data has been fully successfully restored?

Probably. But as I said, BackupPC didn't check file consistency.

 I think I have about 1000 files missing (out of about 35000)...

You think? Do you really miss one of this 1000 files?

 Now, this wouldn't be the end of the world, but I'd be interested to know
 if when it reports success, it has definitely brought back the entire
 dataset...

Yes. But possible not all the files YOU expected in the backup dataset.

 ... and if so... do you have any suggestions as to why I may have
 different numbers of files?
 

How do you measure the file counts?

 I've just tried this - I booted to a live CD and e2fsck-ed the device...
 On first scan, it reported clean... I'm now running a e2fsck -f to force
 it to check, but assuming that it reports the device as clean, then can I
 assume that the backups are not corrupted?

Yes!

 In which case, I have to wonder about the missing files...
 Am I just worrying unneccessarily?
 
Probably. We didn't know yet if really files are missing or if your
measurement is wrong.

br
Matthias
-- 
Don't Panic


--
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-21 Thread Vetch
Hi Matthias,

Thanks for your help on this...

See replies below...

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Matthias Meyer matthias.me...@gmx.liwrote:

 Vetch wrote:

 
  Ok - I tried direct restores back into the original directories over the
  network - and it came up with successful restores for all the home
  directories...
  Does this mean that the data has been fully successfully restored?

 Probably. But as I said, BackupPC didn't check file consistency.


Ok... So it could be that the files are corrupt in the database...
Though given the positive e2fsck results, that seems unlikely...



  I think I have about 1000 files missing (out of about 35000)...

 You think? Do you really miss one of this 1000 files?


No - I haven't noticed any missing files, so I'm not too worried
(realistically, I tend to keep numerous versions of any important document
I'm working on anyway, so...)

 Now, this wouldn't be the end of the world, but I'd be interested to know
 if when it reports success, it has definitely brought back the entire
 dataset...

Yes. But possible not all the files YOU expected in the backup dataset.


Ok... so backuppc managed to restore all the data it has available...
... but perhaps I didn't count properly, or alternatively, didn't backup
properly in the first place...



  ... and if so... do you have any suggestions as to why I may have
  different numbers of files?
 

 How do you measure the file counts?


I took the somewhat unscientific approach of using an offline backup and
using windows to count the files based on the properties...
Essentially, I had one of the folders stored as an offline backup (the one
with 35000-ish files in) which I synchronise most days...
I used the windows properties to count files in the folder (36026) and then
I took an archive (zip) copy of my offline directory which also 36026 files
in it, based on the archive file count...
I then connected to the server, synchronised and used the windows properties
on it again...
It showed (I can't remember now exactly), but I believe it was around
35200...
I then restored the archive and now the folder properties report 36093 (I
attribute the extra files to being ones which are not offline synchronisable
using the Windows XP offline files (e.g. .pst files, etc)...
Now, potentially, I guess that means that there could have just been more
files on my offline copy (I expected about 14 since the offline synch
claimed that 14 files had changed and needed to be synchronised)...
Equally, possibly there were files on my offline copy that couldn't be
copied to the server through synch and I didn't know...
... though I would have expected to have noticed previously...
Equally, it's possible that the backuppc user didn't have rights on the
server to backup all files on the server, but I was ssh-ing in and sudo-ing
the command, so I believe that should give it root access for the rsync
command...
I don't know - it just seems like there should have been more files...

Like I say, I'm not particualarly bothered, as I think it's highly unlikely
any of the files I genuinely need have been completely lost, but still...
I'd be interested in knowing what caused the discrepancy - if it's my
counting, my setup, my configuration or the system behaving strangely...



  I've just tried this - I booted to a live CD and e2fsck-ed the device...
  On first scan, it reported clean... I'm now running a e2fsck -f to force
  it to check, but assuming that it reports the device as clean, then can I
  assume that the backups are not corrupted?

 Yes!


Excellent... Well, that's good news...



  In which case, I have to wonder about the missing files...
  Am I just worrying unneccessarily?
 
 Probably. We didn't know yet if really files are missing or if your
 measurement is wrong.


Heh - it's probably my measurement, isn't it? ;)
Oh well - let's hope so ;)

Once again many thanks,

Jx


 br
 Matthias
 --
 Don't Panic



 --
 ___
 BackupPC-users mailing list
 BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
 List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
 Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
 Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

--
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-21 Thread Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
Vetch wrote at about 00:14:06 +0100 on Wednesday, July 22, 2009:
  Hi Matthias,
  
  Thanks for your help on this...
  
  See replies below...
  
  On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Matthias Meyer matthias.me...@gmx.liwrote:
  
   Vetch wrote:
  
   
Ok - I tried direct restores back into the original directories over the
network - and it came up with successful restores for all the home
directories...
Does this mean that the data has been fully successfully restored?
  
   Probably. But as I said, BackupPC didn't check file consistency.
  
  
  Ok... So it could be that the files are corrupt in the database...
  Though given the positive e2fsck results, that seems unlikely...
  
  
  
I think I have about 1000 files missing (out of about 35000)...
  
   You think? Do you really miss one of this 1000 files?
  
  
  No - I haven't noticed any missing files, so I'm not too worried
  (realistically, I tend to keep numerous versions of any important document
  I'm working on anyway, so...)
  
   Now, this wouldn't be the end of the world, but I'd be interested to know
   if when it reports success, it has definitely brought back the entire
   dataset...
  
  Yes. But possible not all the files YOU expected in the backup dataset.
  
  
  Ok... so backuppc managed to restore all the data it has available...
  ... but perhaps I didn't count properly, or alternatively, didn't backup
  properly in the first place...
  
  
  
... and if so... do you have any suggestions as to why I may have
different numbers of files?
   
  
   How do you measure the file counts?
  
  
  I took the somewhat unscientific approach of using an offline backup and
  using windows to count the files based on the properties...
  Essentially, I had one of the folders stored as an offline backup (the one
  with 35000-ish files in) which I synchronise most days...
  I used the windows properties to count files in the folder (36026) and then
  I took an archive (zip) copy of my offline directory which also 36026 files
  in it, based on the archive file count...
  I then connected to the server, synchronised and used the windows properties
  on it again...
  It showed (I can't remember now exactly), but I believe it was around
  35200...
  I then restored the archive and now the folder properties report 36093 (I
  attribute the extra files to being ones which are not offline synchronisable
  using the Windows XP offline files (e.g. .pst files, etc)...
  Now, potentially, I guess that means that there could have just been more
  files on my offline copy (I expected about 14 since the offline synch
  claimed that 14 files had changed and needed to be synchronised)...
  Equally, possibly there were files on my offline copy that couldn't be
  copied to the server through synch and I didn't know...
  ... though I would have expected to have noticed previously...
  Equally, it's possible that the backuppc user didn't have rights on the
  server to backup all files on the server, but I was ssh-ing in and sudo-ing
  the command, so I believe that should give it root access for the rsync
  command...
  I don't know - it just seems like there should have been more files...
  
  Like I say, I'm not particualarly bothered, as I think it's highly unlikely
  any of the files I genuinely need have been completely lost, but still...
  I'd be interested in knowing what caused the discrepancy - if it's my
  counting, my setup, my configuration or the system behaving strangely...

Well, with Windows there can be all kinds of reasons for mismatches
including:
1. Busy files that can't be backed up (not just .pst files but also
   other open files and various registry and system files)
2. Permissions/acl issues - even with ssh as admin/root there may
   still be files you can't access. I'm not a Windows guru but I know
   it's not as simple as linux where root can read everything
3. Junctions can end up being double counted
4. Other weird Windows detritus - I have at times had weird ntfs files
   that hang around and are non-deletable (until I boot into Linux)

Maybe I'm biased, but I always find Windows to be way more cumbersome,
obscure, and unpredictable than the simple metaphors of *nix
filesystems.


  
  
  
I've just tried this - I booted to a live CD and e2fsck-ed the device...
On first scan, it reported clean... I'm now running a e2fsck -f to force
it to check, but assuming that it reports the device as clean, then can I
assume that the backups are not corrupted?
  
   Yes!
  
  
  Excellent... Well, that's good news...
  
  
  
In which case, I have to wonder about the missing files...
Am I just worrying unneccessarily?
   
   Probably. We didn't know yet if really files are missing or if your
   measurement is wrong.
  
  
  Heh - it's probably my measurement, isn't it? ;)
  Oh well - let's hope so ;)
  
  Once again many thanks,
  
  Jx
  
  
   br
   Matthias
   --
   Don't Panic
  
  
  
   

Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-21 Thread Holger Parplies
Hi,

sorry for replying so late, busy week.

Matthias Meyer wrote on 2009-07-20 21:59:49 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore 
issues]:
 Vetch wrote:
  I tried restoring a backup to my system - it kept on failing with aborted
  by signal=PIPE.
  I have a feeling it may have been related to corrupt files within the
  hardlinks, since when I tried restoring using tar, the tar files were not
  readable,

How did you create the tar file(s), what was the error reported? Was it
completely unreadable, or did it abort on a specific file? Always the same
file? Did you try with different source backups? Even though you might be
interested in the lastest versions of your files, choosing an older backup to
restore might give you some clues (or older versions of missing files).

  and the zip files didn't have as many files in as I would have
  expected...

How did you create the zip file(s)?

  I guess if there are problems with the data, there's probably nothing that
  can be done?
 
 Probably not much :-(

Well, the part of the data that is unaffected should be, err, unaffected.
There is probably a lot you can do, assuming a partial restore is better than
nothing. You might be able to restore older versions of files that are missing
in the latest backup.

One of the virtues of BackupPC is that you have file level access to all
files. It's not like a read error on a tape or a compressed archive, beyond
which all data may be lost. And you can quickly locate different versions of
the same file in different backups.

If the problem is with the tar stream (e.g. a huge file that is incorrectly
encoded), you can always directly access the files with BackupPC_zcat, though
that won't scale to many files. But it does mean you may be able to access
more data than at first apparent.

  How does backuppc check the consistency of the data once it's been added
  to the pool?
  I know that it only backs up the data once, but how does it make sure that
  the data is in a valid state?

That is not completely true. Depending on the XferMethod, each *full* backup
will either re-transfer the complete data set and reuse only perfectly
matching pool files (i.e. on-disk corruption would *not* cause a corrupted
file to be reused), or at least check all data against the stored backup and
re-create any changed files (also causing corrupted files not to be reused).
With rsync(d) and --checksum-seed in RsyncArgs this checking is limited to
RsyncCsumCacheVerifyProb - 1% of the files by default - so a corrupted file
may in fact be reused. This is why this behaviour is turned *off* by default
(i.e. if you didn't enable it, it's off; if you did, you know it, and it's your
fault ;-).

 I didn't believe that backuppc will check data consistency. That is the job
 of a filesystem. e2fsck will do that for ext2/3 file systems.

That is incorrect. e2fsck will check *file system metadata* for *detectable*
corruption. I don't believe e2fsck will attempt to read all used data blocks
- that could take hours on large file systems, and would make the badblocks(8)
program somewhat pointless - and, in any case, it couldn't check data
consistency beyond detecting read errors reported by the disk hardware.

So, no, e2fsck will do nothing more than confirm that your file system
metadata has no detectable errors.

 You should run it regulary.

Yes, probably. Though I have not yet heard any reports of if and in what time
e2fsck successfully completes for BackupPC pool file systems. It may or may
not have problems with the large number of files with more than one link. I
don't know.

 I assume you are running BackupPC on Linux and use ext3 as filesystem.
 So I would advise:
 1) make a image backup (e.g. partimage) of your /var/lib/backuppc or
 wherever your __TOPDIR__ resides.

This part is the most important of all. e2fsck can effectively lose data you
could have accessed before (or, at least, make it next to impossible to find).
If your file system is already damaged beyond recognition, you don't have much
options, but it doesn't seem to be. I'd recommend mounting it read-only
instead of checking it. As soon as you have a copy of as much data as you can
(and need to) retrieve, you can run e2fsck and see if the situation improves.

For your BackupPC pool, I wouldn't recommend trusting a repaired file system
(unless only trivial things were repaired that didn't make much of a difference
in the first place). File system metadata doesn't contain much redundancy to
allow for reconstructing lost information. Unattached inodes can be found, but
will you have any idea, where in which backup(s) lost+found/#123456 really
belongs? Incorrect link counts can be corrected, but that does not restore
the missing links, it simply acknowledges the fact that they have been lost.
Contradictory information, that would crash the file system driver, can be
resolved, so that it will not, but that does not mean the result is correct
in the sense of as it was before corruption.

If your

[BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-20 Thread Vetch
Hi all,

I have a question...

I tried restoring a backup to my system - it kept on failing with aborted by
signal=PIPE.
I have a feeling it may have been related to corrupt files within the
hardlinks, since when I tried restoring using tar, the tar files were not
readable, and the zip files didn't have as many files in as I would have
expected...

I didn't seem to be able to resolve that, so I wiped the system (keeping the
home directory in tact), and rebuilt the server.
Now, unfortunately, the software I use to run the file server decided to
delete my home directories when I restored the configuration...
Go figure...
So now, I'm really worried because I think that I will have lost about 100GB
of data that I believed was backed up...
Anyway, I'm trying to restore now, but the tar files are still coming up as
unreadable...

I guess if there are problems with the data, there's probably nothing that
can be done?

How does backuppc check the consistency of the data once it's been added to
the pool?
I know that it only backs up the data once, but how does it make sure that
the data is in a valid state?
Is it checksums? If so, then I guess it can't be a corruption error...
... but I don't get why I would be finding directories of 3000 files showing
only 1500 in a full backup...

Can anyone help? Any support would be greatly appreciated...
I've got all the coursework from a Masters and a PhD on there!

Jx
--
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge  
This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time, 
vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize  
details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore issues

2009-07-20 Thread Matthias Meyer
Vetch wrote:

 Hi all,
 
 I have a question...
 
 I tried restoring a backup to my system - it kept on failing with aborted
 by signal=PIPE.
 I have a feeling it may have been related to corrupt files within the
 hardlinks, since when I tried restoring using tar, the tar files were not
 readable, and the zip files didn't have as many files in as I would have
 expected...
 
 I didn't seem to be able to resolve that, so I wiped the system (keeping
 the home directory in tact), and rebuilt the server.

Which system? Your BackupPC server or your backup client?

 Now, unfortunately, the software I use to run the file server decided to
 delete my home directories when I restored the configuration...
 Go figure...
 So now, I'm really worried because I think that I will have lost about
 100GB of data that I believed was backed up...
 Anyway, I'm trying to restore now, but the tar files are still coming up
 as unreadable...
 
 I guess if there are problems with the data, there's probably nothing that
 can be done?

Probably not much :-(
 
 How does backuppc check the consistency of the data once it's been added
 to the pool?
 I know that it only backs up the data once, but how does it make sure that
 the data is in a valid state?
 Is it checksums? If so, then I guess it can't be a corruption error...
 ... but I don't get why I would be finding directories of 3000 files
 showing only 1500 in a full backup...

I didn't believe that backuppc will check data consistency. That is the job
of a filesystem. e2fsck will do that for ext2/3 file systems. You should
run it regulary.
 
 Can anyone help? Any support would be greatly appreciated...
 I've got all the coursework from a Masters and a PhD on there!
 
 Jx

I assume you are running BackupPC on Linux and use ext3 as filesystem.
So I would advise:
1) make a image backup (e.g. partimage) of your /var/lib/backuppc or
wherever your __TOPDIR__ resides.
2) try to open some files (select files which are importend for you) from
the BackupPC GUI (use your backup client, open http:\\your
server/backuppc, login, left hand menu, Browse Backups, click on a file
and say open)
3) run e2fsck on the device where /var/lib/backuppc located (unmount the
device first) and expect to lost data if e2fsck find file system errors.

You should run e2fsck as soon as possible. Elsewere filesystem errors can
grows and destroy more data then necessary.

I have had a similiar problem 7 month ago. A lot of file system errors and I
lost most of my backups. Fortunately I didn't lost data on my backup
clients at the same time.

br
Matthias
-- 
Don't Panic


--
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge  
This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time, 
vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize  
details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-20 Thread Craig Barratt
Lee writes:

 Sorr I missed information.  I am restoring to RHEL4 box.  I can transfer 
 500MB files no problem, but once I try 2GB or more it fails with a PIPE 
 error.  I have been able to transfer a 2GB file maybe twice out of the 20 
 times I've tried.  Any ideas?
 
 Not directly related to the original post but i seem to have lots of problems 
 relating to larger files with rsync, even when I am backing up large files, 
 like Exchange database, it causes issues, but it doesn't have this issue with 
 every deployment of backuppc, I'm not sure what to do.
 
 I've tried changing my transfer method from rsync to smb and this is what I 
 get in the log when backing up a windows machine.

What version of BackupPC and smbclient are you using?  Earlier versions
of both have problems with large files.

Craig

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-20 Thread Lee A. Connell
Craig I switched back to rsync, as I found the issue, it wasn't
backuppc's client timeout I needed to change, but I totally forgot about
the host's rsync timeout, after increasing that, everything is working
like a champ!!! Thanks for reply!

Lee Connell
Ammonoosuc Computer Services, Inc.
Network Engineer

15 Main St. Suite 10
Littleton, NH 03561
603-444-3937

If you require immediate response please send your inquiry to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Craig Barratt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:40 PM
To: Lee A. Connell
Cc: backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files 

Lee writes:

 Sorr I missed information.  I am restoring to RHEL4 box.  I can
transfer 500MB files no problem, but once I try 2GB or more it fails
with a PIPE error.  I have been able to transfer a 2GB file maybe twice
out of the 20 times I've tried.  Any ideas?
 
 Not directly related to the original post but i seem to have lots of
problems relating to larger files with rsync, even when I am backing up
large files, like Exchange database, it causes issues, but it doesn't
have this issue with every deployment of backuppc, I'm not sure what to
do.
 
 I've tried changing my transfer method from rsync to smb and this is
what I get in the log when backing up a windows machine.

What version of BackupPC and smbclient are you using?  Earlier versions
of both have problems with large files.

Craig

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.21/1456 - Release Date:
5/20/2008 6:45 AM
 

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-19 Thread Eduardo Trápani
 I get the error below with large files, this one is around 2GB, files around 
 500MB transfer and restore with no problem. What can be causing this? I am 
 running rsync 2.6.8 on both client and server.

You are restoring to Linux, Windows, MacOSX?  2G is, for example the size limit 
for FAT32, no way you can restore a bigger file to a, say WinXP with FAT32.

Eduardo.

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-19 Thread Chris Baker
 You are restoring to Linux, Windows, MacOSX?  2G is, for example the size
limit for  FAT32, no way you can restore a bigger file to a, say WinXP with
FAT32.

 Eduardo.

I think you mean that 2 GB is the limit for FAT16. Windows 95a was the last
FAT16 operating system released by Microsoft.

The limit for FAT32 is 8 TB. This was released with Windows 95b in 1996. How
many of us in 1996 figured that we would have terabyte drives in 2008?

It is reported that FAT64 will support up to 16 exabytes.

Chris Baker -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
systems administrator
Intera Inc. -- 512-425-2006




-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-19 Thread Les Mikesell
Chris Baker wrote:
 You are restoring to Linux, Windows, MacOSX?  2G is, for example the size
 limit for  FAT32, no way you can restore a bigger file to a, say WinXP with
 FAT32.
 
 Eduardo.
 
 I think you mean that 2 GB is the limit for FAT16. Windows 95a was the last
 FAT16 operating system released by Microsoft.

No, he means that 2GB is the _file_ size limit for FAT32 for any single 
file.

 The limit for FAT32 is 8 TB. 

That's the volume size limit with the maximum cluster size.

 This was released with Windows 95b in 1996. How
 many of us in 1996 figured that we would have terabyte drives in 2008?

Apparently no one at all, since scandisk will only check volumes of 128 
gb or less.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-19 Thread Lee A. Connell
Sorr I missed information.  I am restoring to RHEL4 box.  I can transfer 500MB 
files no problem, but once I try 2GB or more it fails with a PIPE error.  I 
have been able to transfer a 2GB file maybe twice out of the 20 times I've 
tried.  Any ideas?

Not directly related to the original post but i seem to have lots of problems 
relating to larger files with rsync, even when I am backing up large files, 
like Exchange database, it causes issues, but it doesn't have this issue with 
every deployment of backuppc, I'm not sure what to do.

I've tried changing my transfer method from rsync to smb and this is what I get 
in the log when backing up a windows machine.

}Üh�ÜUðßàöÄzÜ`�ÜUøé{ÿÿÿÝØ3À[^ÉÂ�Ì‹ÿU‹ìQ‹E
S3Û;Ãu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/attrib (ed8d4fc28920fb5327c53f64019fa61b)
tarExtract: Unexpected end of tar archive (tot = 1048576, num = 287232, posn = )
tarExtract: Removing partial file 
�‹ø;û|I8Ôt‹E‹@@8X/ujôÿÌ�Pè”øÿÿ„ÀtVjëVS‹Eü‹jPÿ‘€���‹ø‹Eü‹PÿQ;û}‹Çë‹E
‹
‰‹6‹VÿP3À_^[ÉÂ�Ì‹ÿU‹ìVÿu
ÿuÿÔ�‹ð…ö}G�þó€uÿuh
tarExtract: BackupPC_tarExtact aborting (Unexpected end of tar archive)
tarExtract: Done: 188 errors, 48 filesExist, 802 sizeExist, 181034 
sizeExistComp, 66 filesTotal, 21520584660 sizeTotal
Got fatal error during xfer (Unexpected end of tar archive)
Backup aborted (Unexpected end of tar archive)

Lee Connell
Ammonoosuc Computer Services, Inc.
Network Engineer

15 Main St. Suite 10
Littleton, NH 03561
603-444-3937

If you require immediate response please send your inquiry to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Baker
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 3:16 PM
To: backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

 You are restoring to Linux, Windows, MacOSX?  2G is, for example the size
limit for  FAT32, no way you can restore a bigger file to a, say WinXP with
FAT32.

 Eduardo.

I think you mean that 2 GB is the limit for FAT16. Windows 95a was the last
FAT16 operating system released by Microsoft.

The limit for FAT32 is 8 TB. This was released with Windows 95b in 1996. How
many of us in 1996 figured that we would have terabyte drives in 2008?

It is reported that FAT64 will support up to 16 exabytes.

Chris Baker -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
systems administrator
Intera Inc. -- 512-425-2006




-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.21/1454 - Release Date: 5/19/2008 
7:44 AM
 
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-19 Thread Eduardo Trápani
 You are restoring to Linux, Windows, MacOSX?  2G is, for example the size
 limit for  FAT32, no way you can restore a bigger file to a, say WinXP with
 FAT32.

 I think you mean that 2 GB is the limit for FAT16. Windows 95a was the last
 FAT16 operating system released by Microsoft.

No, I did mean FAT32.  The size limit (for *files*) is 4G (not 2G, sorry).

 The limit for FAT32 is 8 TB. This was released with Windows 95b in 1996. How
 many of us in 1996 figured that we would have terabyte drives in 2008?

That is the limit for the *drive* size.  But whoever posted the original 
message was trying to recover a file from backuppc, not a disk.  4G for a 
restore can be reached pretty easily, it just happened to me yesterday on a 
WindowsXP with FAT32 and the error message you get is in the lines of disk 
full.

Eduardo.

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


[BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-16 Thread Lee A. Connell
I get the error below with large files, this one is around 2GB, files
around 500MB transfer and restore with no problem. What can be causing
this? I am running rsync 2.6.8 on both client and server.
 
Server Log
Sorted file list has 1 entries
PostSortFile 0: BACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_654815103
Got #0 (BACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_654815103), blkCnt=0, blkSize=0,
rem=0
/var/lib/backuppc/pc/prod/62/fWBBIBACKUP/fBACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_65
4815103 cache = , invalid = , phase = 0
BACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_654815103: opened for read
exiting after signal PIPE
Restore failed: aborted by signal=PIPE
 
Client Log
2008/05/16 16:06:02 [12664] connect from prometheus (192.168.0.200)
2008/05/16 16:06:02 [12664] rsync to oracle/ from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(192.168.0.200)
2008/05/16 20:11:02 [12664] rsync error: timeout in data send/receive
(code 30) at io.c(171) [receiver=2.6.8]
2008/05/16 20:11:02 [12664] rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (258
bytes received so far) [generator]
2008/05/16 20:11:02 [12664] rsync error: error in rsync protocol data
stream (code 12) at io.c(463) [generator=2.6.8]

 

 

Lee Connell
Ammonoosuc Computer Services, Inc.
Network Engineer

15 Main St. Suite 10
Littleton, NH 03561
603-444-3937

If you require immediate response please send your inquiry to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

 

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/


Re: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files

2008-05-16 Thread Chris Baker
Has anyone used the Western Digital My Book studio drives with Linux? Do
they work with Linux? Western Digital says that they don't support them.
 

Chris Baker -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
systems administrator
Intera Inc. -- 512-425-2006


 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee A.
Connell
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 3:34 PM
To: backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [BackupPC-users] Restore Issues with larger files


I get the error below with large files, this one is around 2GB, files around
500MB transfer and restore with no problem. What can be causing this? I am
running rsync 2.6.8 on both client and server.
 
Server Log
Sorted file list has 1 entries
PostSortFile 0: BACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_654815103
Got #0 (BACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_654815103), blkCnt=0, blkSize=0, rem=0
/var/lib/backuppc/pc/prod/62/fWBBIBACKUP/fBACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_654815
103 cache = , invalid = , phase = 0
BACKUP_DB_WBBI_S_3201_P_2_T_654815103: opened for read
exiting after signal PIPE
Restore failed: aborted by signal=PIPE
 
Client Log
2008/05/16 16:06:02 [12664] connect from prometheus (192.168.0.200)
2008/05/16 16:06:02 [12664] rsync to oracle/ from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(192.168.0.200)
2008/05/16 20:11:02 [12664] rsync error: timeout in data send/receive (code
30) at io.c(171) [receiver=2.6.8]
2008/05/16 20:11:02 [12664] rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (258 bytes
received so far) [generator]
2008/05/16 20:11:02 [12664] rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream
(code 12) at io.c(463) [generator=2.6.8]

 

 

Lee Connell
Ammonoosuc Computer Services, Inc.
Network Engineer

15 Main St. Suite 10
Littleton, NH 03561
603-444-3937

If you require immediate response please send your inquiry to
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/