I've got a 90MHz Pentium on the network that seems to get only
1.5MB/min backup rate as a remote client. Is this about par for the
course? Any suggestions if there are problems?
.
Owen Watson
at home in Wellington, New Zealand
--
Reply to: RE: using large hard disk as backup desitination
Michael,
I'm really not sure why this was done. I'm assuming it was decided to wait until Apple
lifted the 2GB limit before working around it in the software. Now that Apple has
lifted the limit, that's our cue to change Retr
This is a good example of when to use the asynchronous scsi calls. While the call
completes you can be doing waitnextevent so the computer is not FROZE during this
time. (Which can be over 1 minute for some media!)
Tom
> Reply to: RE: during retrospect rewind the tape...
>Oops! That
Hmmm - here's an alternate possibility:
1. Set up a folder for each client volume to be backed up
2. Set each folder as a volume using the subvolume option in Retrospect
3. Create a duplicate script for each of these. Using the duplicate
function with replace entire HD, you will get a mir
Reply to: RE: during retrospect rewind the tape...
Oops! That last paragraph was wrong. What I meant to say was...
>The reason it takes so long? My guess is that Retrospect is waiting
until
>the command that it sent to the tape drive (to REWIND) has completed
>before freeing up the mac
Reply to: RE: during retrospect rewind the tape...
Lionel,
Retrospect will now always rewind your tape when you quit the application
to (among other reasons) prevent problems writing an end of data marker.
We were finding that with certain tape drives, if you told Retrospect (in
earlie
At 8:34 AM -0800 12/17/1999, Matthew Tevenan wrote:
>Reply to: RE: using large hard disk as backup desitination Wade,
>
>Up until Mac OS 9, the maximum file size was 2 GB. Now that Apple
>has lifted that limit, we need to change Retrospect to reflect that
>new capability. We'll probably be doing
no no, this could work. If you could get Retro to treat a bunch of disk
images as if they were 2G removables, it would stripe the backup data
across as many of them as it needed. The backup would not be limited to
2G. The disk images would be like multiple tapes (zips, cdr's, etc) in a
storage set
>RE: You can use resedit to make retrospect recognize other media. I
>back up to disk images all the time. Ask tech support for the fix
>or if you can't get it I have it archived away somewhere.
>
>Tom
In this case it doesn't gain me anything, really, since the disk
images have the same 2GB s
RE: You can use resedit to make retrospect recognize other media. I back up to disk
images all the time. Ask tech support for the fix or if you can't get it I have it
archived away somewhere.
Tom
>
>Retrospect doesn't seem to want to recognize the disk as a removable media, which it
>isn't.
>If you back up to a "Macintosh Disk" rather than a "Macintosh File",
>does the 2 GB limit still apply? (This prevents you using the drive for
>anything else however)
>
>If not, you could partition your big HD down into 2 GB chunks. Then
>Retrospect should parcel the "Retrospect Data" file among t
Reply to: Re: using large hard disk as backup desitination
Luke,
You're right, but not all hard drives are recognized as removables by the
OS. Certain formatting software (I know LaCie's "SilverLining" is one)
formats hard drives with the removable bit on so they appear to Retrospect
a
We have installed Retrospect workgroup 5.0 and have experienced a problem
from day one that is repeatable and consistent on our Intergraph server.
The problem comes after we run a backup that requires more than one tape.
When Retrospects asks for the second tape and one is put in the drive it
co
If you back up to a "Macintosh Disk" rather than a "Macintosh File",
does the 2 GB limit still apply? (This prevents you using the drive for
anything else however)
If not, you could partition your big HD down into 2 GB chunks. Then
Retrospect should parcel the "Retrospect Data" file among them as
14 matches
Mail list logo
