Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-16 Thread Ken Gillett

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 backup speed.

I would reeccomend backing up using Appletalk since that sems to 
produce the most reliable backup, albeit slower.


I also have 519 errors that currently prevent me from performing my 
Retrospect backups. But it occurs with NT clients as well as Mac, so 
AppleTalk is not an option.

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 and shouldn't it 
have been designed to cope with that in the first place?

I'm pretty fed up with its inability to perform network backups over 
an otherwise perfectly functioning network. Maybe it's not happy with 
my 10baset hub, but nothing else complains and I don't see that I 
should start swapping out LAN hardware to keep Retrospect happy - 
even if it were to make any difference. My setup is an 8100/OS9.0.4 
server running Retrospect and nothing else, a beige G3 client and an 
NT client with NT4 sp5 and a 3COM 10baset card connected via a 
Netgear hub. Nothing special and only Retrospect has a problem.

Exactly what is the 519 error? How can it lose contact with a client? 
They're still physically connected and unless the network has crashed 
surely there's no reason why communication couldn't be re-established 
for the backup to continue.



-- 



Ken  G i l l e t t
---


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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-16 Thread John Gee

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. Retrospect could go slower/safer but write a warning to the 
log like:
"Recovering from 519 error, establishing lower performance connection"

That way Retrospect still works at full speed on a faultless network, 
but degrades gracefully when there are subtle problems. I have always 
managed to eventually find the cause of the problem Retrospect has 
exposed, but it isn't always convenient to track down these subtle 
problems right away, and it certainly hurts when Retrospect is 
(apparently) the only application affected by a problem.
-- 
John Gee[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dunedin, New ZealandProgrammers live in interesting times...



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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-16 Thread Hunter Parrot

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 and shouldn't it
have been designed to cope with that in the first place?

I'm pretty fed up with its inability to perform network backups over
an otherwise perfectly functioning network. Maybe it's not happy with
my 10baset hub

Exactly what is the 519 error? How can it lose contact with a client?
They're still physically connected and unless the network has crashed
surely there's no reason why communication couldn't be re-established
for the backup to continue.

error -519 is, in my experience, caused by a number of things.  Sometimes a
screensaver will slow the client down enough to make the server drop the
connection, or maybe the user decides his machine is acting too slowly (not
knowing it's being backed up and that most people don't work at 1:30 AM)
and restarts the client.  Old versions of Eudora used to cause 519s because
their "You have mail" dialog halted processing on the client.  In nutshell,
519 is caused by any incident that causes the data stream between the
client and the server to be broken.

I'm curious as to the nature of Retrospect's relationship with Network
hardware, like switches and routers.  We have several Cisco switches on our
network (over 200 Macs and about 50 Wintel) and Cisco has told us in the
past to do things like "disable the spanning tree protocol on the port that
feeds the offending Mac".  We'd end up reenabling it and solving the
problem on the mac itself with software.  My point is that _if_ Retrospect
is sensitive to these things, then there are dozens of little factors, on
our network anyway, that could contribute to a problem, even though it
appears to be working fine in all other respects.  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?

and At 10:51 PM +1200 8/16/00, John Gee wrote:

It would be nice if Retrospect behaved more like 56k modems, and
automatically downgraded performance until a reliable connection was
possible. Retrospect could go slower/safer but write a warning to the
log like:
"Recovering from 519 error, establishing lower performance connection"

Good idea, but I think Retro. already behaves like that.  I've sat in front
of a server, backing up a sick PC, and watched the transfer rate drop from
36Mb to 2 Mb/min.  It never actually dropped the connection, it just took 3
hours to back the thing up!  In my experience 519 is generated when the
valve is out-and-out shut off.
I think the log entry idea is a great one.  Maybe a separate entry
for the xfer speed at the start and again at the finish of a client's
backup?

-HP


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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-16 Thread Matt Barkdull

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 doesn't detect network activity so it my be the culprit.

Note that Energy saver on the Mac is on unless you tell it to be off. 
Simply disabling the Control Panel will not turn energy saver off.



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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-16 Thread Matt Barkdull

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 really makes it.  I'm talking 
large... 300 to 500 MB in size.

Retrospect copies files in a very steady stream.  Web browsing, 
printing, and email do it in short burst.

Yes, if you network has a minor problem, it will show up in 
Retrospect.  It will also show up in ARCServe and it will also show 
up in Amanda.  It is not platform or software dependant.

I do network performance monitoring all the time here and still one 
of my earliest indicators of possible problems is the nightly backups.

MB



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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-15 Thread jakob krabbe


Hi and thanx for your post! That was a good one to be the first one! Maybe
that explains some of our problems related to some clients. They also just
stops for no clear reason, running Sonnet and 8.6. You are talking about
the processorupgrade, right!?

Loads of thanx for your input! :-)

/ jakob

At 12:24 2000-08-15 -0400, you wrote:
Hi.  1st post on this list, I'll try to keep it as condensed as possible,
but this problem



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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-15 Thread Hunter Parrot

At 6:36 PM +0200 8/15/00, jakob krabbe wrote:
Hi and thanx for your post! That was a good one to be the first one! Maybe
that explains some of our problems related to some clients. They also just
stops for no clear reason, running Sonnet and 8.6. You are talking about
the processorupgrade, right!?

The sonnet crescendo G3 processor upgrade, version 1.4.2 to 1.4.4, yup.
I'm not having the problem with OS8.6 machines, I actually only have 1 6100
with 8.6 installed  and it does have the same problem, but since there's
only one of them I didn't include that fact in my original post.
But let me add another thing now.  I just backed up a 6100 with the
crescendo and OS9.  I've got it's disk divided into three partitions with
OS9, 8.6 and 8.5 respectively for testing this very problem.  The remote
generated error -519 while backing up the first partition, but then it went
on and successfully backed up the other two partitions!  Does "Network
Communication" happen on a volume-by-volume basis, or machine-to-machine?
It seems like if network communication fails, the whole machine would then
be down for the count.  In fact, I know this to be true  because other macs
with more than one volume will generate a -519 error and any volumes on
that mac not yet backed up will _not_ get backed up.
Could this have anything to do with DHCP?  All our macs get their
IP numbers from a DHCP server, but the leases are currently set to never
expire (don't ask why)

-HP


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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-15 Thread Matt Barkdull

   If I remove the Crescendo card from the remote or disable the
driver for it, the problem goes away.  If I keep the hardware as it is and
switch to backing up over Appletalk, the problem goes away.  A 6100 without
a Crescendo will have a spotless backup record until I install a Crescendo
in it, but the TCP/Appletalk factor indicates that the problem is a little
deeper than just hardware.  6100s with Crescendos and OS 8.x backup fine
too.  Finally, Macs other than 6100s and 7100s, but with OS9 and a
crescendo G3 have no problem.

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.




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




Re: OS9/TCP/Sonnet problem...

2000-08-15 Thread Philip Chonacky

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 backup speed.

I would reeccomend backing up using Appletalk since that sems to produce the most 
reliable backup, albeit slower.

my $.02

-Philip Chonacky

At 2:14 PM -0400 8/15/00, Matt Barkdull wrote:
  If I remove the Crescendo card from the remote or disable the
driver for it, the problem goes away.  If I keep the hardware as it is and
switch to backing up over Appletalk, the problem goes away.  A 6100 without
a Crescendo will have a spotless backup record until I install a Crescendo
in it, but the TCP/Appletalk factor indicates that the problem is a little
deeper than just hardware.  6100s with Crescendos and OS 8.x backup fine
too.  Finally, Macs other than 6100s and 7100s, but with OS9 and a
crescendo G3 have no problem.

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.




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


___
Philip Chonacky, IS Manager
Barrett Companies
ph. (617) 577-9500
fx. (617) 577-1010
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




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