Networker

Re: [Networker] Recovery Issues with Modified time.

2011-01-07 14:06:53
Subject: Re: [Networker] Recovery Issues with Modified time.
From: Andy Fahy <farske10 AT HOTMAIL DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 19:06:21 +0000
Known issue with this version. Upgrade your version asap. Emc will tell you 
this. You may have success with doing a recovery from the command line though! 

Sent from Samsung Mobile

Campo <networker-forum AT BACKUPCENTRAL DOT COM> wrote:

>I have just discovered an issue with our Networker backups and wondered if 
>anyone else had experienced this. 
>We have Networker 7.5.1 running on a windows W2K3 SP2 server with a pair of 
>LTO4 Libraries attached. We run incremental backups daily with a full once a 
>week. Because of the nature of our business these backups are kept forever.
>When trying to recover files using Networker Administrator some backup entries 
>are showing a modified time of January 1970, and a file size of zero, despite 
>the fact the backups "passed". When you try and recover the recovery fails 
>with the following;
>
>Recovering files of client '<<Client Server>>' from server '<<Backup Server>>' 
>to client '<<Backup Server>>'.
>Recovering 1 file from F:\DCDOCS01\USER\DWSLIB\PETER_CA\SPD\ into D:\Restores
>Requesting 1 file(s), this may take a while...
>D:\Restores\71k_s02_.XLS
>32220:winworkr: `D:\Restores\71k_s02_.XLS' grew by 2098336 bytes during save
>
>Received 0 file(s) from NSR server `<<Backup Server>>'
>Recover errors with 1 file(s)
>Recover completion time: 07/01/2011 11:58:20
>
>I am trawling the logs but can't find much as of yet.
>
>The backups effected appear to be random and change depending on the server 
>and the volume. For example Server_A  F:\ volume has 4 backup dates effected, 
>yet Server_A G:\  volume has 7 different backups effected. Server_B has 4 
>different dates effected, whilst Server_C is not affected at all as far as I 
>can see. This appears to have started in September 2010, and occurred as 
>recently as 2 weeks ago. 
> This obviously causes doubt as to the validity of our backups until a 
> recovery is attempted.
>
>I personally suspect an indexing issue, but what specifically??
>Anybody experienced this? 
>
>Thanks Campo
>
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------
>|This was sent by pete.camp AT snrdenton DOT com via Backup Central.
>|Forward SPAM to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com.
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
>type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
>networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with 
>this list. You can access the archives at 
>http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
>via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
>

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>