--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4G00003 Date: 04/10/97 From: TONY DUNLAP Time: 02:03pm \/To: DALE ROSS (Read 6 times) Subj: 17" Monitors ...and thus spake Dale Ross unto Mike Maguire: MM> This thread started in the Win95 conference. Do you do of a NT MM> conference that discusses NT users problems. DR> Some seem to think that is what this echo is for So is this echo exclusively for NT now? Later Tony Dunlap, (tdunlap@odot.dot.ohio.gov) Any comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of my employer. --- * Origin: (1:2220/30) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00000 Date: 04/11/97 From: ERNIE BOKKELKAMP Time: 10:45pm \/To: DOUG BRYCE (Read 7 times) Subj: Re: Backup program On 05 Apr 1997 17:44, Doug Bryce (1:244/120) wrote: DB>-=> Quoting Roger Hinson to Frank Ramsey <=- DB> DB> RH> Actually Frank, if you are only getting about 2.5G-3G an DB>hour DB> RH> then you may want to try some other software or tune your DB>system.. DB> RH> That's only about 40-50MB/Min and I consistently see those DB>drives DB> RH> backup and 70-90MB/Min, which would be 4.2-5.4G an hour.. DB> DB>There could be a couple of 'yabuts' in there Roger . I'm in DB>the process of setting up one of the 20/40GB DLTs at work. In DB>some of DB>my testing I got 85MB/min backing up a locally attached disk on DB>a P166 DB>machine. On the same machine, backing up a network attached DB>drive DB>(16mbps network), I got ~40MB/min. On a DX2-66 machine, a DB>'loacl' DB>backup ran ~40MB/min :-( Mind you, no matter how you slice it, DB>they DB>are *fast* . I have observed the same. Except that I have been able to obtain about 150 MByte/min on a P.Pro 200 once using very compressable data, but that is a real exception which hardly ever occurs in the real world. Cheers Ernie --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: MsgedQ/Binkley/WinNT 4.0, Fuerth/Muenich, Germany (2:2490/2001.20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00001 Date: 04/11/97 From: ERNIE BOKKELKAMP Time: 10:58pm \/To: FRANK RAMSEY (Read 7 times) Subj: Re: Backup program On 05 Apr 1997 20:31, Frank Ramsey (1:157/603.70) wrote: FR> EB> The Compaq DLT is a small capacity drive. I have just FR> EB> ordered a new system to backup our file servers. The FR> EB> backup software will be Legato Networker running on an FR> EB> Compaq Proliant 5000R with 4 x Pentium Pro 200 under FR> FR>Don't know if it's true for the NT version or not, but both the FR>Netware and Unix versions of Networker require free space to FR>keep their logs. The free space must be equal to 10% of the FR>total size protected, ie. backup 50 gigs, you must have 5 gigs FR>for logs. I have been provided with several estimates how much space will be required for the media index database. According to the most official source this should be < 1% of the total size of the data stored on the backup media which has to be availe for online browsing. For now we will have 20 Gbyte installed for the media index with an option to increase this value if required by adding a few more harddisks or by replacing the 4GB drives by 9GB drives. The library has been overdimensioned to allow for future growth, our storage requirements have been estimated to be about 4 Tbyte increasing to about 8 Tbyte over the next 6 months. Cheers Ernie --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: MsgedQ/Binkley/WinNT 4.0, Fuerth/Muenich, Germany (2:2490/2001.20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00002 Date: 04/12/97 From: ERIC VICE Time: 01:24pm \/To: TONY DUNLAP (Read 7 times) Subj: 17" Monitors Tony Dunlap wrote a message to Dale Ross that said... TD> So is this echo exclusively for NT now? Hope not. . Eric Vice - ericv@gryn.org - www.geocities.com/Heartland/1340 .. E-mail evkey@zazoo.gryn.org for my public PGP key. ... He who hesitates is reloading. --- timEd/386 1.10+ * Origin: Zazoo's of Courtice (1:229/624) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00003 Date: 04/12/97 From: ROGER HINSON Time: 10:31am \/To: GARY GILMORE (Read 7 times) Subj: Backup program > On Wed, Apr. 09, 1997, Gary Gilmore (1:2410/400) said this: GG>DB> have a look at the exabyte mamoth it do 6meg a sec and uses 160m tapes GG>DB> [evaporated metal arcitecture] and stores 70gig none GG>DB> compressed and over 100gig compressed. now thats a tape drive GG>And still won't restore your registry properly when you're forced to do a GG>complete restore, so (like all tape drives), is useless when backing up he GG>operating system. GG>After needing to do two restores in the past year, and losing all my egist GG>in the process (making the OS "retarded"), I'm convinced that tape is alse GG>security where the OS is concerned. :-/ > My reply to this What types of problems did you have restoring the registry? Since it's really just a few files, it shouldn't be too difficult and should be rather easy to work around for any situation unless the files on the tape are bad.. I've found tape to be a rather good medium as long as you compare the Tape to Disk after running a backup.. Of course, I work for a Tape Backup company, o I may be biased :) Tech Wizard --- WWIVGate 1.12c * Origin: Dragon's Dreams [619-562-3928] (1:202/1318) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00004 Date: 04/12/97 From: ROGER HINSON Time: 10:36am \/To: CHRIS HOLTEN (Read 7 times) Subj: Backup program > On Thu, Apr. 10, 1997, Chris Holten (1:303/1) said this: CH>I recently had a fight with NT 4.0 backing up and restoring to a larger hard CH>drive, but It had nothing to do with the registry. Currently NT 4.0 with it' CH>service packs and hot fixes, in my opinion, is a damned mess, nothing at all CH>like earlir NT versions. The difficulty I had was that the person had CH>installed SP2, + Hot fixes, got them screwed up by adding and then CH>reinstalling NT 4.0 and SP2 with no hot fixes. It was a mess getting restore CH>is NTldr was evidently a different version on the back up than it was on the CH>NT reinstall + hotfixes. Crashed NT every time after re-boot after e-store CH>until I figured out the boot file(s) that were problem. Even after that mess CH>upon sucessful restore, the registry, file permissions, ownership, etc was CH>correct. > My reply to this I've actually seen this problem quite a lot. Another common result of not putting the OS back to the same level as the backup before restoring is n empty FROM box when you go to log in... I can't wait for SP 3.. Roger... --- WWIVGate 1.12c * Origin: Dragon's Dreams [619-562-3928] (1:202/1318) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00005 Date: 04/12/97 From: FRANK RAMSEY Time: 08:40pm \/To: ALL (Read 7 times) Subj: Courious/suggestions Got a question about service packs, hot fixes, Novell NT client and the order to load. My thought is to load NT, then the service packs, then the hot fixes, then Novell's client. Our standard right now is to load NT, then the Novell client, then the service packs and the hot fixes. Saves a reboot or two. Seems a sure way to insure files are not proper. While we're at it, another question becomes should the service packs and hot fixes be redone with each application software install. Say Office '97. And others. framsey@goodyear.com; CIS 71631,1032 - CNE, CNA-4, PE --- EZPoint V2.2 * Origin: -- A Point on Pine Lake (330)-796-3146 -- (1:157/603.70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00006 Date: 04/12/97 From: CHRIS HOLTEN Time: 09:04pm \/To: ROGER HINSON (Read 7 times) Subj: Backup program RH> Currently NT 4.0 with it' CH>service packs and hot fixes, in my opinion, is a CH>damned mess, nothing at all CH>like earlir NT versions. The difficulty I had was that the person had CH>installed SP2, + Hot fixes, got them screwed up by adding and then CH>reinstalling NT 4.0 and SP2 with no hot fixes. It CH>was a mess getting restore CH>is NTldr was evidently a different version on the RH> back up than it was on the CH>NT reinstall + hotfixes. Crashed NT every time after CH>re-boot after re-store CH>until I figured out the boot file(s) that were RH> problem. Even after that mess CH>upon sucessful restore, the registry, file CH>permissions, ownership, etc was CH>correct. > My reply to this RH> I've actually seen this problem quite a lot. RH> Another common result of RH> not putting the OS back to the same level as the backup RH> before restoring is an RH> empty FROM box when you go to log in... I can't wait for SP 3.. The problem is that you can't put the OS back to the same level if your hotfixes are screwed up in the first place which is quite easy to do. It's anybodies guess at that point. I don't know about Service Pack III even. I have lost my confidence in NT 4.0 and even though I've many opportunities to install it, I'm not. Just too damn many hassels and bullsh@t to have to put up with from a "premium" PC operating system. NT 3.51 is still far and away MS's best operating system. Windows 95b with FAT 32 is better and more stable than NT 4.0 workstation. Personally I am waiting for NT 4.01. Hopefully NT 4.0 will be wide beta'd enough by then that NT will get back close to some semblence of rock solid reliability and ease of use that we have come to expect from NT. If not, then MS has really let IBM's toe in the door with OS/2 connect. --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: 33,600bps Windows NT _Powered_! (1:303/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00007 Date: 04/12/97 From: MARK WRIGHT Time: 03:58am \/To: GARY GILMORE (Read 7 times) Subj: Backup program GG=> DB> have a look at the exabyte mamoth it do 6meg a sec and uses 160m tapes GG=> DB> [evaporated metal arcitecture] and stores 70gig none GG=> DB> compressed and over 100gig compressed. now thats a tape drive GG=>And still won't restore your registry properly when you're forced to do a GG=>complete restore, so (like all tape drives), is useless when backing up the GG=>operating system. GG=>After needing to do two restores in the past year, and losing all my regist GG=>in the process (making the OS "retarded"), I'm convinced that tape is false GG=>security where the OS is concerned. :-/ GG=>It's times like that when I pine for DOS.. restore, and go. Gary, Have not had any problems restoring win95 workstations using nt3.51 server backup on a dat drive. What backup drive are you using? software? Time_Wounds_All_Heels______Mark Wright______Kirkland WA__USA * OLX 2.1 TD * Do you have nude pictures of your wife? Want to buy some? --- GEcho 1.11+ * Origin: (1:343/70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: E4H00008 Date: 04/11/97 From: STEVE LESNER Time: 06:14pm \/To: ALL (Read 7 times) Subj: Nt and Perl I've done everthing I can to set simple CGI perl scripts to run under NT. Dloaded the 32 bit perl program, tested the most simple scripts, renamed them to cgi extensions, defined my cgi-bin, and tryed both IIs 3.0 and Netscape Fastract. Ie reports something stupid like error 501, yeah right. Real helpful. Netscape gets a bit esoteric and reports: Server Error This server has encountered an internal error which prevents it from fulfilling your request. The most likely cause is a misconfiguration. Please ask the administrator to look for messages in the server's error log. If you look at the log, its error 501. Any help much appreciated, these scripts run fine if I boot linix and Warp and add the needed perl libs and exes. Damn thing is if I execute guestbook.pl, nt runs it from a command line! --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: Nidus Bullet BBS @ www.nidusnet.com (203) 322.4135 (1:141/261)