The support forum

Beta Release 45

Alex Pankratov :

Oct 24, 2013

Issued fixed


1. Fixed a memory leak in the backup planner - this was introduced in Beta 41 along with the support of optional copying of "created" timestamps. More specifically, it relates to the changes to directory timestamps - if there were some detected, internal data representing these changes wasn't correctly disposed of.

2. Fixed an issue with balloon notifications in the systray not showing *at all* on XP. Most notably this includes the "update available" notifications.

3. Fixed another issue with systray notifications that, under certain rare circumstances, could trigger a self-consistency check failure and abort the program.

4. Lastly, I got two really odd crash reports, both from 32-bit W7, both failing outside of the app and in one of Windows' native functions (GetFileSizeEx). I put in a provisional fix for this, but it's essentially a wild guess as I can't make any sense out of these crashes :-/

Other changes


1. Changed the maximum number of past backup runs that are kept in the UI log from 100 to 50. This is primarily done to reduce run-time memory consumption.

2. On Windows XP only - removed the call that switched off "local file buffering" when copying to/from a network location. This is a standard copying speed optimization, but on XP it makes no sense and merely generates errors in the log. So - removed.

Alex Pankratov :

Oct 24, 2013

.
Ahem. A hiccup on the server side it seems, sorting out...

halo9 :

Oct 26, 2013

Hi Alex,
Nice little program. I only discovered version 1 last week and then came across the beta yesterday. Had to give it a go. The UI improvements are great and it is very easy to use.

I have set up a couple of backups and tried to put it through its paces going nuts changing settings while running all without any issues except for 1 little thing.

While running a backup in the standard mode, I went into preferences and ticked run as administrator and accepted to restart. The program shut down and then I got a windows Program Compatibility Assistant  popup asking if the software was installed correctly. I said it was and had to manually restart it.  I checked the exe files compatibility settings and W7 has not changed anything. I have since not been able to replicate the error so am assuming an issue with my admin rights since I am using a work laptop with strict IT control.

Also I wanted a faster way to backup my Lotus Notes databases and the delta copy works great most of the time. Sometimes though after only a small update to a 7gb db, it still has to copy about 5gb of it even though the data change is only 1-2mb. I'm guessing this is due to the data type and/or the db structure. In either case it is still saving me time in backups.

Sorry I'm no expert in this so just giving you feedback on my experiences.
Will let you know if I pick anything else up.

Alex Pankratov :

Oct 26, 2013

Thanks for the notes, @halo9. The Assistant popup - I made a note and will keep an eye on it.

it still has to copy about 5gb of it even though the data change is only 1-2mb.


What numbers are you looking at? What does it say in the backup log?

halo9 :

Oct 27, 2013

Hi Alex,

I haven't had a chance to log into our works server to replicate the databases and do another backup run but I have had a look at the backup log to see if I could spot anything unusual.

2013.10.26 16:14:00.733 (UTC-8) 2 2 7. Updating file mym3\Lotus\Notes\Data\Business\EXP\EXP00043.NSF

2013.10.26 16:14:00.762 (UTC-8) 3 3 Size: 7.60 GB

2013.10.26 16:18:40.675 (UTC-8) 3 3 Timing

2013.10.26 16:18:40.675 (UTC-8) 3 4 Content: 4 min 0 sec

2013.10.26 16:18:40.675 (UTC-8) 3 5 Performance metrics: 8052 / 7 / 481 / 5 / 1048576 / 65536 / 4 / 2 / 263382612 / 120190 / 663110 / 15587408 / 0 / 11219 / 4300

2013.10.26 16:18:40.675 (UTC-8) 3 4 Extras: 69 ms

2013.10.26 16:18:40.675 (UTC-8) 3 3 Completed in 4 min 0 sec, copied 5.45 GB out of 7.60 GB


At first I misread the file and thought the pause and resume (next file) was for this file as the timing of it and the amount copied match up quite well, but it was just me. Nothing unusual here.

Here is the log file continuing on from the file copied above.

2013.10.26 16:18:40.675 (UTC-8) 2 2 8. Updating file mym3\Lotus\Notes\Data\Business\EXP\EXP00082.NSF

2013.10.26 16:18:40.675 (UTC-8) 3 3 Size: 5.09 GB

2013.10.26 16:19:18.553 (UTC-8) 2 2 Paused

2013.10.26 16:19:24.665 (UTC-8) 2 2 Resumed

2013.10.26 16:21:09.453 (UTC-8) 3 3 Timing

2013.10.26 16:21:09.454 (UTC-8) 3 4 Content: 2 min 0 sec

2013.10.26 16:21:09.454 (UTC-8) 3 5 Performance metrics: 42166 / 6 / 488 / 5 / 1048576 / 65536 / 4 / 2 / 148283198 / 124 / 32003 / 347770 / 0 / 10840 / 0

2013.10.26 16:21:09.454 (UTC-8) 3 4 Extras: 1.52 ms

2013.10.26 16:21:09.454 (UTC-8) 3 3 Completed in 2 min 0 sec, copied 96 KB out of 5.09 GB

2013.10.26 16:21:09.454 (UTC-8) 2 2 9. Updating file mym3\Lotus\Notes\Data\Business\EXP\EXP00161.NSF

2013.10.26 16:21:09.454 (UTC-8) 3 3 Size: 11.13 GB

2013.10.26 16:24:55.432 (UTC-8) 3 3 Timing

2013.10.26 16:24:55.432 (UTC-8) 3 4 Content: 3 min 0 sec

2013.10.26 16:24:55.432 (UTC-8) 3 5 Performance metrics: 33977 / 9 / 707 / 9 / 1048576 / 65536 / 4 / 2 / 225017765 / 139 / 508334 / 360483 / 0 / 18315 / 0

2013.10.26 16:24:55.432 (UTC-8) 3 4 Extras: 2.48 ms

2013.10.26 16:24:55.432 (UTC-8) 3 3 Completed in 3 min 0 sec, copied 1.09 MB out of 11.13 GB

2013.10.26 16:24:55.432 (UTC-8) 2 2 10. Updating file mym3\Lotus\Notes\Data\Business\EXP\EXPL1087.NSF

2013.10.26 16:24:55.432 (UTC-8) 3 3 Size: 473 MB

2013.10.26 16:25:04.339 (UTC-8) 3 3 Timing

2013.10.26 16:25:04.339 (UTC-8) 3 4 Content: 8.87 sec

2013.10.26 16:25:04.339 (UTC-8) 3 5 Performance metrics: 13098 / 12 / 942 / 11 / 1048576 / 65536 / 4 / 2 / 8804538 / 131 / 25306 / 10761 / 0 / 953 / 0

2013.10.26 16:25:04.339 (UTC-8) 3 4 Extras: 3.25 ms

2013.10.26 16:25:04.339 (UTC-8) 3 3 Completed in 8.91 sec, copied 96 KB out of 473 MB

2013.10.26 16:25:04.339 (UTC-8) 2 2 11. Updating file mym3\Lotus\Notes\Data\Business\EXP\EXPL1089.NSF

2013.10.26 16:25:04.339 (UTC-8) 3 3 Size: 13.82 GB

2013.10.26 16:29:19.890 (UTC-8) 3 3 Timing

2013.10.26 16:29:19.890 (UTC-8) 3 4 Content: 4 min 0 sec

2013.10.26 16:29:19.890 (UTC-8) 3 5 Performance metrics: 19449 / 7 / 578 / 7 / 1048576 / 65536 / 4 / 2 / 255069979 / 124 / 54195 / 10721 / 1 / 19779 / 0

2013.10.26 16:29:19.890 (UTC-8) 3 4 Extras: 360 ms

2013.10.26 16:29:19.890 (UTC-8) 3 3 Completed in 4 min 0 sec, copied 160 KB out of 13.82 GB



A little thing I have noticed is your timing script is calculating correctly for anything under 60 seconds, but anything over is rounded off to the nearest minute. Example from above is file 9. It took 3m46s but log says 3m0s.

I will do another run tonight if I can and report back.

halo9 :

Oct 28, 2013

I have updated to beta 47 and replicated my databases taking note of size changes. I have done another run with bvckup and it ran great this time. One of the databases grew by 730mb and the delta copy picked it up and copied it exactly. All the others only copied minimal data as I was hoping. Great job!

I set up another backup job to copy my full user account to a copy I already had on an external HDD and on the first run after accepting the warning of folders already existing I got the following errors in the log (there were 10 folders in total).

2013.10.28 18:13:33.902 (UTC-8) 0 3 Directory can't be scanned, access denied: J:\WORK\Backup\Users\mym3\Documents\My Pictures\

2013.10.28 18:13:33.902 (UTC-8) 0 3 Directory can't be scanned, access denied: J:\WORK\Backup\Users\mym3\Documents\My Music\

2013.10.28 18:13:33.902 (UTC-8) 0 3 Directory can't be scanned, access denied: J:\WORK\Backup\Users\mym3\Documents\My Videos\


I ran it again straight after and this time no errors and everything updated fine. Bvckup was running in administrator mode.

Thanks

Alex Pankratov :

Oct 28, 2013

All the others only copied minimal data as I was hoping.


It's nice when it works as designed, isn't it? :)

I got the following errors in the log


Not much I can say to this except that bvckup2.exe process was in fact denied an access to these directories for some reason. I haven't seen this one before nor do I honestly have any idea what might've been causing this. I'll make a note of this though to see it crops up again.

halo9 :

Oct 28, 2013

Yes weird, especially considering it worked next run without restarting anything. I am running it on a corporate laptop though with lots of UAC in place. I've also been changing folders and rerunning and hasn't skipped a beat since that first run.

Pretty solid software so far. Nice work.

Alex Pankratov :

Oct 28, 2013

Thanks.

Alex Pankratov :

Nov 01, 2013

It took 3m46s but log says 3m0s.


That's a damn good catch. One of (very) few differences between 32- and 64-bit where getting a bit sloppy causes this sort of issue. Fixed, will be B48.

New topic

Create
Made by IO Bureau in Switzerland
Support

Updates
Blog / RSS
Follow Twitter
Reddit
Miscellanea Press kit
Testimonials
Company Imprint

Legal Terms
Privacy