rav007
-
Posts
11 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Bug Reports
Documentation
Landing
Posts posted by rav007
-
-
12 hours ago, ich777 said:
I've now tried the following:
- Set up a source folder with 3 files in it called "1", "2", "3" and also set up a empty destination folder
- Set up a task in luckyBackup and set the "Snapshots to keep" to 5 (just in case)
- Run the first sync, all 3 files are synced properly
- Delete file "2" from the source
- Ran another sync, file "2" is now also deleted from the destination
- Restarted the container (just in case)
- Opened "Manage Backup" and selected the first sync, clicked on "Restore" and restored it to a third directory
- All three files "1", "2" and "3" are now in the 3rd directory
Is it necessary to restore it to a 3rd directory? Is there a way to just restore the missing files/older file versions to the source directory... As that's how I'm used to versioning working. I'd really hate to have to restore 20tb of data to a 3rd new directory to get just a few missing files or an older version of an existing file or is there a way to select specific files to restore?
Also is the calculate difference function not something to really on? Everything is the magenta color, source data does not exist at the snapshot. Which as I'm understanding means the snapshot isn't aware of the source data?
I appreciate your help in me understanding this software, I like to have a firm grasp on my backup solutions and make sure I'm doing my part correct as well!
-
Switching from resilio-sync to luckybackup and 99.9% of my source data already exists at the destination, same folder structure and everything I'm just having luckybackup do a "proper" versioned backup which it what I wanted, not a constant syncing. Anyway it seems when I check the snapshots , I'm seeing purple source data does not exist at the snapshot and well, it appears to be everything in purple I guess so that means the snapshot dosent contain any of the data that's existing, thinking it was all created after the snapshot? I've run plenty of tests and its moving new files or modified files over but I'm concerned the snapshot is disregarding all files that haven't changed, because they existed at the destination prior to luckybackups installation. Is there anything I can do for it to scan and recognize these files?
edit 1:
Well after playing around with it some more I think versioning is broken. Not sure what mistake I could have made? I did a backup, deleted a file on the source, did the backup again and verified the file was gone on the destination and when I tried to restore both versions neither version of the history restored the file.
edit2:
so upon further digging - > when i delete files off the source its putting them into the luckbackup-snapshots folder as i believe its supposed to, the problem is that when i delete the files off the source then do another backup, the files are removed from the destination as they should be. but if i go back to the prior snapshot to do a restore, it fails to restore the deleted files.
unless im misunderstanding the core mechanic of how this is supposed to work?
-
21 hours ago, 5hurb said:
Looks like your transcode folder is set to prefer to use the cache drive. Try changing this to only so that the mover wont touch them
I did end up moving to another nvme cache and it's currently set to only. The folder the videos are in had cache set to yes and the files upon completion were being moved to the primary cache drive as a result. It seems when the mover is invoked when the cache drive reaches it's set 90% tdarr is processing the files as expected and moving them from the nvme cache drive to the primary cache drive (due to cache being enabled on the video folder location) during the move it's not placing a lock on the files and the mover just happily moves a 1kb-200meg in-copy file and then tdarr, I assume, just errors out due to the move. I'm not sure if this is a bug or just the nature of the way tdarr replaces files. In the short term, I have turned off cache to process my library for my video folder. I would caution anyone in a similar situation processing a large chunk of their library to watch out for this, as you may find several video files cut very, very short.
-
I'm having a super weird issue, I've got 4 nodes total, 2 windows and 2 unraid with unraid running the server. If the unraid box that runs the server initiates the mover, all the transcodes "complete" at 1kb-5mb and replace the originals. Anyone else having issues ? Diagnostic attached of server/node1
-
10 hours ago, makkish said:
I encountered the same error when I tried to purge an old worker. I got the following suggestion from Guy in the Discord channel, which resolved it:
1) Stop Machinaris container in Unraid Admin UI2) Delete only this file: /mnt/user/appdata/machinaris/machinaris/dbs/machinaris.db
3) Start Machinaris container in Unraid Admin UI
4) Wait about ~3-5 minutes for everything to start and get re-populated. Then try clicking around in Machinaris WebUI.
This did the trick! Thank you very much !
-
1
-
-
Getting this error when I select the pools tab with the latest (just updated) test branch
-
I chased my tail around for a while with btrfs cache corruption, a very long story short it was faulty memory. Personally any and all problems I've had with unraid have been memory related. I'd start by ruling that out with 24 hours of a mem test
-
is anyone have trouble with lancachebundle as of 10/4 or there abouts not allowing windows update? i had to bypass it completely to resume normal function....
-
Same here. been wracking my brain for about 2 hours trying to solve this, looks like it was an update (timed perfectly with a docker corruption)
[Support] ich777 - Application Dockers
in Docker Containers
Posted
Sooooo I accidentally answered my own question. Looks like under the luckybackup.sourceforge.net/todo.html it's listed under high priority to only restore part of a snapshot and considering the date listed on the website stops at 2019.... That isn't very hopeful... I think this is a GREAT sync utility but that places a lot of limitations on backup solution, at least in my use case.