Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC on client machine running on Fedora13
jiahwei wrote at about 20:27:09 -0700 on Sunday, August 21, 2011: > But somehow it doesn't backup my Home directory, even though I tried > indicate /home to the backup/ WHAT??? This sentence fragment means nothing... What is 'it'? What are you talking about? Are you replying to some other comment? What is the context? > +-- > |This was sent by jiahwei_cvs...@hotmail.com via Backup Central. > |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. > +-- How many times do people need to be told this is a mailing list and not a forum. Unless you cut and paste the context, we have no clue what you are talking about. If you want to get help here then join the mailing list rather than using Backup Central which is some type of hack that tries to pretend the mailing list is a forum. Craig: Is it possible to block mail originating from Backup Central since it seems to just cause endless problems. Perhaps there could be an auto-reply that asks the user to sign up on the mailing list... -- uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev ___ 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] BackupPC on client machine running on Fedora13
But somehow it doesn't backup my Home directory, even though I tried indicate /home to the backup/ +-- |This was sent by jiahwei_cvs...@hotmail.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- -- uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev ___ 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] BackupPC on client machine running on Fedora13
Hi Les, I did not put any passphrase. I left it blank. But I tried generating the ssh keys again, and copied over to the client machine. It seems to work now. Thanks for your help.. =)) Thanks +-- |This was sent by jiahwei_cvs...@hotmail.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- -- uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev ___ 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] Backuppc problem with filenames
Hi Jesper,
Thanks for the reply, unfortunately this did not resolve the problem. I set
the "unix charset =ISO8859-1" and then restarted the samba server, but to no
avail. I then tried changing the code page in BackupPC for rsyncd to cp850,
which the samba documentation indicated would be required to match the
iso8859-1 setting, but that also did not help.
I am still at a loss on how to proceed.
Regards,
Paul
Hi Paul,
In my experience you also need to set the Samba charset besides the backuppc
client charset when using backuppc over smb with these special characters.
smb.conf:
...
[global]
unix charset =ISO8859-1
...
I have the same issue as you describe just with speciel danish characters(æ,
ø and å) and setting the charset in Samaba solves this.
Regards
Jesper
On 21-08-2011 07:07, Paul Cain wrote:
Hello,
I'm having an issue with backuppc, that I have not seen reported in any of
the user lists.
I am using the latest versions of backupppc(3.2.1 on Ubuntu 10.04) and
cygwin / rsyncd (1.7.9 / 3.08) on WinXP (SP3).
I am backing up a large directory of mp3 files ~6,000 files.
>From all appearances the backup works fine:
- The rsyncd.log shows each file being transferred with no errors.
- The Backuppc log reports the successful completion of the backup
indicating receipt of all ~6000 files
and the transfer of over 24GB.
But
when I browse the backup most of the files are not there!!
After some investigation I discovered that any file with a filename starting
with (, -, or ) are not being
copied to the disk
Since a majority of my files begin with ( they are not being reflected in
the backuppc backup directory.
I have the $Conf{ClientCharset} option set to cp1252 for the WinXP config.
Has anyone seen anything like this before? Am I missing something obvious?
I hope I can resolve it without resorting changing 4000+ filenames
Thanks in advance for any assistance,
Paul
--
Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system,
user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take
the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the
tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2___
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] Feature request: log both starts.
We use dumpPreUserCmd to run database dumps, then backup the resulting files. Some of these dumps take a *really* long time. The annoying part is that the logs don't show the *actual* start time of the backups (that is, the time when the dumpPreUserCmd is started), they only show the "start" of the part after that, the backup of the actual files, so you get lovely discrepencies like this: 2011-08-19 09:25:22 incr backup started back to 2011-08-15 00:15:45 (backup #378) for directory / 2011-08-19 10:01:46 incr backup 379 complete, 11 files, 3205841445 bytes, 0 xferErrs (0 bad files, 0 bad shares, 0 other) 2011-08-20 18:10:23 full backup started for directory / (baseline backup #379) 2011-08-20 18:46:34 full backup 380 complete, 12 files, 3285062302 bytes, 0 xferErrs (0 bad files, 0 bad shares, 0 other) vs. this: Backup# TypeFilled Level Start Date Duration/mins Age/days Server Backup Path [snip] 380 fullyes 0 8/19 10:01 1964.7 2.3 /backups/pc/[snip] The reason it says the full started at "8/19 10:01" is because it was queued on the BgQueue and started running th dumpPreUserCmd immediately after the incremental finished. But the logs don't show that at all, they say it "started" at "2011-08-20 18:10:23" (which is, what, 32 hours later?). I would very much like if the logs included both the very start and the start of the actual transfer. Thanks. -Robin -- http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future. Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false" is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/ -- Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 ___ 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] Solved, again; devs please read (was Re: The one-at-a-time nightly problem returns (was Re: The one-at-a-time nightly problem, debugged; DEVS PLEASE READ; long.))
Ah-*HAH*! Got it!
So (part of) the problem, *AGAIN*, is the way the CmdQueue tests the
*front* of the queue, but pulls jobs from the *BACK* of the queue.
Now, what happens if a backup goes for a really long time? Like,
more than 24 hours? Well, even though it's still running, an entry
for that host is also put in the background queue, which means that
when the current backup finshes, a new one runs immediately, which
is fine.
The problem occurs when the current backup finishes *during a
nightly run*. This means that the link can't run. But it gets
queued on the CmdQueue. Then the backup on the BgQueue starts.
Then the nightlies end, and the link on the CmdQueue tries to run.
It refuses, with a "Botch on admin job" message, because a backup
for that host is running. This happens many many many many many
times, until the next nightlies try to run.
So the new nightlies get pushed onto the *FRONT* of the CmdQueue via unshift;
now the queue is a bunch of nightlies and some
Here's the top of the CmdQueue loop:
while ( $CmdJob eq "" && @CmdQueue > 0 && $RunNightlyWhenIdle != 1
|| @CmdQueue > 0 && $RunNightlyWhenIdle == 2
&& $bpc->isAdminJob($CmdQueue[0]->{host})
) {
local(*FH);
$req = pop(@CmdQueue);
$host = $req->{host};
if ( defined($Jobs{$host}) ) {
print(LOG $bpc->timeStamp,
"Botch on admin job for $host: already in use!!\n");
#
# This could happen during normal opertion: a user could
# request a backup while a BackupPC_link is queued from
# a previous backup. But it is unlikely. Just put this
# request back on the end of the queue.
#
unshift(@CmdQueue, $req);
return;
}
So the loop can be entered, no problem, because it's nightly time
($RunNightlyWhenIdle == 2 is true) and the first job in the queue is
a nightly job ( $bpc->isAdminJob($CmdQueue[0]->{host} is true) and
there's certainly more than one such job. So it enters the queue,
and then *POPS* the *LAST* job off the queue. This is a *LINK* job,
not a nightly, and, better still, *it fails*, which means that the
*front* of the queue now holds a link job.
Now we're back at the top of that while, which works because CmdJob
(which gets cleared at the end of every successful CmdQueue job
but does not get set in the failure case) is empty, so we take the
first branch, since "$RunNightlyWhenIdle != 1" is true. So we kick
off the nightly that's at the end of the queue (which, since unshift
was used in order, is the first one).
Now we have a nightly running (CmdJob is not ""), *AND* the first
job in the queue is a link job (
$bpc->isAdminJob($CmdQueue[0]->{host}) is false). This means we
can't enter either branch of the CmdQueue loop, and we're stuck
until the nightly finishes.
This is what the logs look like in this case:
2011-08-21 07:00:02 Running 16 BackupPC_nightly jobs from 0..15 (out of 0..15)
2011-08-21 07:00:02 Botch on admin job for [host2]: already in use!!
2011-08-21 07:00:02 Next wakeup is 2011-08-21 08:00:00
2011-08-21 07:00:04 Running BackupPC_nightly -m 0 15 (pid=17895)
So there's the problem with testing the front of the queue and then
popping the back of the queue (!!), which I pointed out long ago and
the devs don't seem to want to fix. Fixing that would allow the
nightlies to run even when there's a link job mucking things up, but
it wouldn't stop the logs from being spammed with Botch messages.
Here's two options that would:
1. Don't start a backup, even a bgQueue backup, when a link for
that host is pending.
2. Don't put a backup for a host on the bgQueue when a backup (or
link job) for that host is currently running, even in QueueAllPCs.
-Robin
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 08:52:38AM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> So, I haven't figured out why yet, but this keeps happening on my
> hosts *even though* I'm not running "BackupPC_serverMesg
> BackupPC_nightly run".
>
> As far as I know, other than "BackupPC_serverMesg server reload"
> running from a script every once in a while, and having an extremely
> large configuration, I'm doing nothing abnormal.
>
> I am now running 3.2.1, so it's not an old bug; this happened to me
> on two different hosts within the last couple of days.
>
> What seems to be happening is that after a while I get:
>
> 2011-08-19 10:21:34 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
> 2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
> 2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
> 2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
> 2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
> 2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
> 2011-08-19 10:21:43 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
>
> and then after that, the nightly jobs only run on
[BackupPC-users] The one-at-a-time nightly problem returns (was Re: The one-at-a-time nightly problem, debugged; DEVS PLEASE READ; long.)
So, I haven't figured out why yet, but this keeps happening on my
hosts *even though* I'm not running "BackupPC_serverMesg
BackupPC_nightly run".
As far as I know, other than "BackupPC_serverMesg server reload"
running from a script every once in a while, and having an extremely
large configuration, I'm doing nothing abnormal.
I am now running 3.2.1, so it's not an old bug; this happened to me
on two different hosts within the last couple of days.
What seems to be happening is that after a while I get:
2011-08-19 10:21:34 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
2011-08-19 10:21:40 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
2011-08-19 10:21:43 Botch on admin job for [host1]: already in use!!
and then after that, the nightly jobs only run one at a time until I
completely restart the server. Which I really don't want to do on
one of the servers because I'm in the middle of a 5 day backup.
This is really bad for my systems, and really frustrating. -_-
-Robin
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 06:11:20PM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
>
> Figured it out. The problem was that I have BackupPC set to run 8
> nightlies at once (which usually takes 12 or more hours), but it was
> ending up in a state where only one was running at a time.
>
> This may be the longest, most detailed debugging writeup I've ever
> done in 15 years of being a computer professional; I hope y'all
> appreciate it. :) I had to do this to hold all the relevant state
> in my head.
>
> It turns out that the issue occurs when the 24-hour-ly nightlies job
> is already running, and you do
>
>sudo -u backuppc BackupPC_serverMesg BackupPC_nightly run
>
> which I've been doing a lot.
>
> Deciding to queue new nightly jobs goes like this:
>
> while ( $CmdJob eq "" && @CmdQueue > 0 && $RunNightlyWhenIdle != 1
> || @CmdQueue > 0 && $RunNightlyWhenIdle == 2
> && $bpc->isAdminJob($CmdQueue[0]->{host}) ) {
>
> We'll be coming back to this a lot. "isAdminJob" matches nightly
> jobs only AFAICT.
>
> CmdQueue State: Empty
> CmdJob: Empty
> RunNightlyWhenIdle: 0
> While State: False, since @CmdQueue <= 0
> Running Job State: Empty
> Event:
>
> Normal nightly run occurs. RunNightlyWhenIdle is set to 1, which
> triggers all the nightly jobs getting added to the queue, and
> RunNightlyWhenIdle getting set to 0
>
> CmdQueue State: 8 nightly jobs
> CmdJob: Empty
> RunNightlyWhenIdle: 2
> isAdminJob Matches First Job: True
> While State: True, via Branch 2
> Running Job State: Empty
> Event:
>
> Nightly jobs get kicked off, all 8 of them.
>
>
> CmdQueue State: Empty
> CmdJob: non-empty; "admin7" or similar
> RunNightlyWhenIdle: 2
> isAdminJob Matches First Job: False
> While State: False, since @CmdQueue <= 0
> Running Job State: 8 nightly jobs
> Event:
>
> A backup finishes, and queues up a BackupPC_link job. This
> happens several times, since the nightly jobs take 8+ hours, even
> split into 8 parts, on my machine (4+TiB of backups per backup
> machine).
>
> CmdQueue State: Several link jobs
> CmdJob: non-empty; "admin7" or similar
> RunNightlyWhenIdle: 2
> isAdminJob Matches First Job: False; link jobs don't match
> While State: False
> Running Job State: 8 nightly jobs
> Event:
>
> User runs "sudo -u backuppc BackupPC_serverMesg BackupPC_nightly
> run". This causes RunNightlyWhenIdle to be set to 1, but before
> that hits the while, the jobs are actually queued, *USING
> unshift*, which puts them at the front of the queue. This is
> where things start to go horribly wrong.
>
> CmdQueue State: 8 nightly jobs, *THEN* Several link jobs
> CmdJob: non-empty; "admin7" or similar
> RunNightlyWhenIdle: 2
> isAdminJob Matches First Job: *TRUE*
> While State: True, branch 2
> Running Job State: 8 nightly jobs
> Event:
>
> *Pop* a job from the queue. This means that even though the
> *test* is for the job from the *front* of the queue, the job that
> actually gets handled is the job at the *end* of the queue.
>
> So, the last job on the queue, a link job, gets run. THIS SHOULD
> NEVER HAPPEN, as I understand it, because nightly jobs (the first
> set) are still running. The link job sets CmdJob, but that
> doesn't matter because we're going through the *second* branch of
> the while, which doesn't care about CmdJob. So, it happily
> launches another link job:
>
> CmdQueue State: 8 nightly jobs, then N-1 link jobs
> CmdJob: hostname non-empty from the last link job
> RunNightlyWhenIdle: 2
> isAdminJob Matches First Job: True
> While State: True, branch 2
> Running Job State: 8 nightly jobs, 1 link job
> Event:
>
> Runs the next link job. And all the others. We end up with *all*
> link jobs ru
[BackupPC-users] Hello everyone
I am a new with BackupPC. Everything works great. Congratulated for well done job. I have only one questions. Can I add my own Python cgi modules in BackupPC and if answer is yes how can do that. I see that i can add perl modules but me and perl not talk the same language a lot. -- Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 ___ 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] Backuppc problem with filenames
Hi Paul,
In my experience you also need to set the Samba charset besides the
backuppc client charset when using backuppc over smb with these special
characters.
/
smb.conf:
...
[global]
unix charset =ISO8859-1
...
/
I have the same issue as you describe just with speciel danish
characters(æ, ø and å) and setting the charset in Samaba solves this.
Regards
Jesper
On 21-08-2011 07:07, Paul Cain wrote:
Hello,
I'm having an issue with backuppc, that I have not seen reported in
any of the user lists.
I am using the latest versions of backupppc(3.2.1 on Ubuntu 10.04) and
cygwin / rsyncd (1.7.9 / 3.08) on WinXP (SP3).
I am backing up a large directory of mp3 files ~6,000 files.
From all appearances the backup works fine:
- The rsyncd.log shows each file being transferred with no errors.
- The Backuppc log reports the successful completion of the backup
indicating receipt of all ~6000 files
and the transfer of over 24GB.
But...when I browse the backup most of the files are not there!!
After some investigation I discovered that any file with a filename
starting with "(", "-", or ")" are not being
copied to the disk...
Since a majority of my files begin with "(" they are not being
reflected in the backuppc backup directory.
I have the $Conf{ClientCharset} option set to cp1252 for the WinXP config.
Has anyone seen anything like this before? Am I missing something obvious?
I hope I can resolve it without resorting changing 4000+ filenames...
Thanks in advance for any assistance,
Paul
--
Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system,
user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take
the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the
tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2
___
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/
--
Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system,
user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take
the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the
tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2___
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/
