>I can't for the life of me see how that file meets my Include
>statement's condition. What's going on here?
The restore can include surprising files. If Retrospect backed up a
copy of the file from a different location or even from a different
computer in the same backup set, it may offer to
At 2:33 PM -0400 15/8/00, Philip Chonacky wrote:
>
>I would suspect a subtle hardware timing issue. The 6100's have the
>slowest bus speeds of the PowerPC models, and OS9 was really
>designed for the G3's and up.
>
>Retrospect pushes the limits in tcp/ip mode in order to achieve the
>best back
>I realise that it hits the network pretty hard, but this is no
>surprise and shouldn't it have been designed to cope with that in
>the first place?
It would be nice if Retrospect behaved more like 56k modems, and
automatically downgraded performance until a reliable connection was
possible.
John Gee wrote:
> The restore can include surprising files. If Retrospect backed up a
> copy of the file from a different location or even from a different
> computer in the same backup set, it may offer to restore it to
> effectively multiple locations.
>
> I am not sure if this explains what yo
I am very new to the Retrospect backup program, but looking for an alternate
back up destination. Currently we are running a G4/400, OS 9.0.4, ASIP
6.3.1, Retrospect 4.2. We have approximately 250 GB of hard drive storage
space that needs to be backed up on a regular basis. My goal is to do a
c
> I think this was just discussed but when I clicked the link for the archives
> it just gave me a list and no way to search. Here's the short of it.
> Restored drive, now virtual PC says it wasn't properly installed... Is there
> a "proper" way to restore it? or am I stuck?
The installation of V
I was talking to someone who owns an iBook & iMac who told me her
biggest complaint with both was that there was no way to backup
either.
Can anyone recommend an inexpensive USB solution that is supported by
Retrospect that will work for both computers?
Thanks,
John Mulligan
[EMAIL PROTECTED
I'm not an expert in Retrospect either but I might have a couple of tips.
You can tell Retrospect to back up to a file instead of a device. When you
create a new storage set, you will see a choice called Storage type. Select
Macintosh File and you can save that file wherever you want. You can choo
At 10:14 AM -0800 8/15/00, Matt Barkdull wrote:
>Just as another step to test, did you try going to the TCP/IP control
>panel and unchecking the "Load only when needed" button"? I'm
>wondering if the timing factor is doing something weird to the
>interface and shutting it down.
>
Actually, tha
Hi Steve,
John has you on the right track here. Retrospect will always try to restore
everything that was in the Snapshot...no matter where it originally backed
up the files from. When we say that Retrospect was designed as restore
software, we aren't just blowing marketing smoke. It will always
At 8:11 AM +0100 8/16/00, Ken Gillett wrote:
>Whatever the reason for these communication failure problems it
>worries me that (in my case) the LAN works perfectly for everything
>else, yet Retrospect falls down every time. I realise that it hits
>the network pretty hard, but this is no surprise
At 9:17 AM -0400 8/16/00, Sara M wrote:
>I am very new to the Retrospect backup program, but looking for an alternate
>back up destination. Currently we are running a G4/400, OS 9.0.4, ASIP
>6.3.1, Retrospect 4.2. We have approximately 250 GB of hard drive storage
>space that needs to be backed
I'd go for a USB CD-RW drive. They're affordable, especially in the media
department, offer plenty of capacity for one or two computers, and they're
useful for storage other than just backup.
Retrospect Express 4.3 supports the widest array of USB CD-RW drives, and it
ships free with Sony's Spres
on 8/16/00 7:00 AM, Eric Ullman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd go for a USB CD-RW drive. They're affordable, especially in the media
> department, offer plenty of capacity for one or two computers, and they're
> useful for storage other than just backup.
>
> Retrospect Express 4.3 supports th
Greetings,
I just got off the telephone with a client who was asking me
to upgrade their backup system. They are currently using retrospect
4.3 on a Mac IIsi via 10BT on a switched 10/100 ethernet (client 10,
servers 100)to their DDS3 tape drive. It seems that the IIsi is dying
rather
The 6100 has notorious problems with its built-in ethernet, so a 100-baseT
card is the way to go.
- Original Message -
From: "Harry Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "retro-talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 12:22 PM
Subject: CPU speed vs. Network speed?
> Greeting
>What would give better performance, a G3 upgrade to the 6100 or a 100
>base T card. I can only do one since the 6100 only has one slot.
Either will probably cost more than the computer is worth. Set up the
6100 as is to see where the bottleneck is. If it's the network, 10Base-T
tops out at ab
Harry Mueller wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I just got off the telephone with a client who was asking me
> to upgrade their backup system. They are currently using retrospect
> 4.3 on a Mac IIsi via 10BT on a switched 10/100 ethernet (client 10,
> servers 100)to their DDS3 tape drive. It see
> > I think this was just discussed but when I clicked the link for
>the archives
>> it just gave me a list and no way to search. Here's the short of it.
>> Restored drive, now virtual PC says it wasn't properly installed... Is there
>> a "proper" way to restore it? or am I stuck?
>
>The inst
>Actually, that was one of the 1st things Dantz recommended, but it didn't
>help.
Ok, how about the settings for screen saver and energy saver?
I've got a screen saver on my Mac and one on a Windows 2000 box that
when they kick in, it kills the network downloads. I know that
energy saver does
>Retrospect is just using
>a protocol, be it TCP or Appletalk, to do it's job, right? Maybe it's a
>question of how Retro. _uses_ that protocol. Anyone from Dantz want to
>jump in here?
Before blaming Retrospect, try transferring a very large file from
one mac to the other and see if it reall
>Greetings,
>
> I just got off the telephone with a client who was asking me
>to upgrade their backup system. They are currently using retrospect
>4.3 on a Mac IIsi via 10BT on a switched 10/100 ethernet (client 10,
>servers 100)to their DDS3 tape drive. It seems that the IIsi is
>dying
>Either will probably cost more than the computer is worth. Set up the
>6100 as is to see where the bottleneck is. If it's the network, 10Base-T
>tops out at about 60-70 MB/min. througput. If you're not getting close to
>that (I think we averaged about 40 MB/min.
This is interesting to me. I'm
I keep all my information in databases. It's kinda fun looking back like
this.
1995, Workgroup Server 80 (Quadra 800), DAT, shared 10Base-T ethernet,
best throughput 13.9 MB/min. (14.0 MB/min. backing up the server itself)
1996, Power Mac 6100/66, DAT, shared 10Base-T ethernet, 18.8 MB/min.
(
We're looking into getting an AppleShare IP server for filesharing and it
has brought to my attention that an ASIP server cannot be used as a
Retrospect client!
Is that true and if so, how have you guys solved that problem?
thanx,
/ jakob
--
-
>1999, Power Mac G3/300 (blue), AIT, shared 10Base-T ethernet, 59.2
>MB/min. backing up an iMac, 229 MB/min. backing up the server
>
>2000, Power Mac G3/300, AIT, switched 10/100 ethernet, 347.6 MB/min best
>throughput, 207 MB/min. backing up the server
>
>Dan Knight, information systems manager
> > What would give better performance, a G3 upgrade to the 6100 or a 100
> > base T card. I can only do one since the 6100 only has one slot.
A 100 base T card in a NuBus adapter on a 6100 will only go about 4
times as fast as the 10baseT connection. The drivers, the bus, and the
6100 just aren'
Back up rates differ using: G4/ 400, DDS-4, shared 10Base-T Ethernet. 80
MB/min on first volume, 187 MB/min on second volume, and 93 MB/ min on
third. All three volumes on server. What would cause the difference in the
speed?
--
>From: Matt Barkdull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "retro-tal
>Back up rates differ using: G4/ 400, DDS-4, shared 10Base-T Ethernet. 80
>MB/min on first volume, 187 MB/min on second volume, and 93 MB/ min on
>third. All three volumes on server. What would cause the difference in the
>speed?
80 to 93 is not much, but the 187 would almost indicate that you
on 8/16/2000 3:06 PM, Matt Barkdull at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Back up rates differ using: G4/ 400, DDS-4, shared 10Base-T Ethernet. 80
>> MB/min on first volume, 187 MB/min on second volume, and 93 MB/ min on
>> third. All three volumes on server. What would cause the difference in the
>>
on 8/16/2000 2:01 PM, jakob krabbe at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We're looking into getting an AppleShare IP server for filesharing and it
> has brought to my attention that an ASIP server cannot be used as a
> Retrospect client!
>
> Is that true and if so, how have you guys solved that problem?
Hello Jakob,
You may certainly back up an AppleShare IP server using the client software.
In fact, we do so in our office nightly. If you have any concerns with
setting this up, please give us a call.
Regards,
Irena Solomon
Dantz Development Corporation
925.253.3050
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
on 8/16/2000 11:22 AM, Harry Mueller at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What would give better performance, a G3 upgrade to the 6100 or a 100
> base T card. I can only do one since the 6100 only has one slot.
Go with the G3 upgrade. The 6100 bus is too slow to benefit from a 100Mbps
Ethernet card, bu
on 8/16/2000 8:17 AM, Sara M at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Can Retrospect back up to another server
> on the network such as a Quantum Snap Server? Will the data be compressed?
If you have enough disk space on the Quantum server, then it's a great
option. Retrospect can write data to it via FTP
Reply to: Re: Retro client on an ASIP server
Jon Gardner wrote:
>on 8/16/2000 2:01 PM, jakob krabbe at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> We're looking into getting an AppleShare IP server for filesharing and it
>> has brought to my attention that an ASIP server cannot be used as a
>> Retros
>> What would give better performance, a G3 upgrade to the 6100 or a 100
>> base T card. I can only do one since the 6100 only has one slot.
>
> Go with the G3 upgrade. The 6100 bus is too slow to benefit from a 100Mbps
> Ethernet card, but the G3 card will at least allow it to maximize the
> ex
Hi Guys,
I've been thinking through possible options wrt maintaining a "hot spare" of
a server and was wondering if anyone has used Retrospect with a script to
routinely duplicate the disk in a primary server to a secondary server?
Will the duplication be like a Recycle backup or after the first
37 matches
Mail list logo
