Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs - Veritas

This is a discussion on Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs - Veritas ; I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz! I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full system backup to tape. Once a ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

  1. Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz
    Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!

    I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full system
    backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a file
    on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups to disk
    would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do not
    verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification errors
    than I am used to getting as well.

    My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent a week
    and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel, Maxtor
    (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data corruption
    issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic and a
    system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a homemade test
    where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive (about 2
    GB of data) and there was no data corruption.

    This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup Exec
    2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the same
    symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the problem.

    What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800 MHz
    instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz to 114
    MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and the PCI
    bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like messing with
    the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any help
    will be greatly appreciated.


  2. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a 1.5GHz
    Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I get
    verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after I turn it
    off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)? Are there
    any programs that are running in the background during your backups?


    "Grasser" wrote in message
    news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz
    > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    >
    > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full system
    > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a file
    > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups to disk
    > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do not
    > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification errors
    > than I am used to getting as well.
    >
    > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent a week
    > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel, Maxtor
    > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data corruption
    > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic and a
    > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a homemade test
    > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive (about 2
    > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    >
    > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup Exec
    > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the same
    > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the problem.
    >
    > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800 MHz
    > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz to 114
    > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and the PCI
    > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like messing with
    > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any help
    > will be greatly appreciated.
    >




  3. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off while doing
    backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone jobs because
    other software may affect the compare. You definitely are running faster than
    me, so I wonder what the problem is.

    If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even after turning it
    off, what do you do?

    Niels Kistrup wrote:

    > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a 1.5GHz
    > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I get
    > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after I turn it
    > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)? Are there
    > any programs that are running in the background during your backups?
    >
    > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz
    > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > >
    > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full system
    > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a file
    > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups to disk
    > > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do not
    > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification errors
    > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > >
    > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent a week
    > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel, Maxtor
    > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data corruption
    > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic and a
    > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a homemade test
    > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive (about 2
    > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > >
    > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup Exec
    > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the same
    > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the problem.
    > >
    > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800 MHz
    > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz to 114
    > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and the PCI
    > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like messing with
    > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any help
    > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > >



  4. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential restore; I have
    been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even after being
    turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger fish to fry,
    but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.

    Niels

    "adam thodey" wrote in message
    news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off while doing
    > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone jobs because
    > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are running faster

    than
    > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    >
    > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even after turning it
    > off, what do you do?
    >
    > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    >
    > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a 1.5GHz
    > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I get
    > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after I turn

    it
    > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)? Are

    there
    > > any programs that are running in the background during your backups?
    > >
    > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz
    > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > >
    > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full

    system
    > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a

    file
    > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups to

    disk
    > > > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do not
    > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification

    errors
    > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > >
    > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent a

    week
    > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel, Maxtor
    > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data corruption
    > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic and a
    > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a homemade

    test
    > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive (about

    2
    > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > >
    > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup Exec
    > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the same
    > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the problem.
    > > >
    > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800 MHz
    > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz to

    114
    > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and the

    PCI
    > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like messing

    with
    > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any help
    > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > >

    >




  5. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem occurs with random
    files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem is due to data
    changing between the backup and the compare. That would not concern me.

    By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately installed Windows 95
    partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.

    Niels Kistrup wrote:

    > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential restore; I have
    > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even after being
    > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger fish to fry,
    > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    >
    > Niels
    >
    > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off while doing
    > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone jobs because
    > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are running faster

    > than
    > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > >
    > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even after turning it
    > > off, what do you do?
    > >
    > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > >
    > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a 1.5GHz
    > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I get
    > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after I turn

    > it
    > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)? Are

    > there
    > > > any programs that are running in the background during your backups?
    > > >
    > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz
    > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > >
    > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full

    > system
    > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a

    > file
    > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups to

    > disk
    > > > > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do not
    > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification

    > errors
    > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > >
    > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent a

    > week
    > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel, Maxtor
    > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data corruption
    > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic and a
    > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a homemade

    > test
    > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive (about

    > 2
    > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > >
    > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup Exec
    > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the same
    > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the problem.
    > > > >
    > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800 MHz
    > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz to

    > 114
    > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and the

    > PCI
    > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like messing

    > with
    > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any help
    > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > >

    > >



  6. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.


    "Grasser" wrote in message
    news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem occurs with

    random
    > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem is due to

    data
    > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not concern me.
    >
    > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately installed

    Windows 95
    > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    >
    > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    >
    > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential restore; I

    have
    > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even after being
    > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger fish to

    fry,
    > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > >
    > > Niels
    > >
    > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off while

    doing
    > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone jobs

    because
    > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are running

    faster
    > > than
    > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > >
    > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even after

    turning it
    > > > off, what do you do?
    > > >
    > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a

    1.5GHz
    > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I get
    > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after I

    turn
    > > it
    > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)? Are

    > > there
    > > > > any programs that are running in the background during your backups?
    > > > >
    > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400

    MHz
    > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full

    > > system
    > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a

    > > file
    > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups

    to
    > > disk
    > > > > > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do

    not
    > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification

    > > errors
    > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent

    a
    > > week
    > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel,

    Maxtor
    > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data

    corruption
    > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic

    and a
    > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a

    homemade
    > > test
    > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive

    (about
    > > 2
    > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup

    Exec
    > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the

    same
    > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the

    problem.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800

    MHz
    > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz

    to
    > > 114
    > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and

    the
    > > PCI
    > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like

    messing
    > > with
    > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any

    help
    > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > >
    > > >

    >




  7. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    The problem was noticed when backing up to a 6 month old hard drive. I am
    pretty much convinced that it is the Backup software. I am curious why only
    about five other people have noticed it and also why Veritas is not addressing
    it.

    Niels Kistrup wrote:

    > How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.
    >
    > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem occurs with

    > random
    > > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem is due to

    > data
    > > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not concern me.
    > >
    > > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately installed

    > Windows 95
    > > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    > >
    > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > >
    > > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential restore; I

    > have
    > > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even after being
    > > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger fish to

    > fry,
    > > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > > >
    > > > Niels
    > > >
    > > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off while

    > doing
    > > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone jobs

    > because
    > > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are running

    > faster
    > > > than
    > > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > > >
    > > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even after

    > turning it
    > > > > off, what do you do?
    > > > >
    > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a

    > 1.5GHz
    > > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I get
    > > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after I

    > turn
    > > > it
    > > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)? Are
    > > > there
    > > > > > any programs that are running in the background during your backups?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400

    > MHz
    > > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full
    > > > system
    > > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a
    > > > file
    > > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups

    > to
    > > > disk
    > > > > > > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do

    > not
    > > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification
    > > > errors
    > > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent

    > a
    > > > week
    > > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel,

    > Maxtor
    > > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data

    > corruption
    > > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic

    > and a
    > > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a

    > homemade
    > > > test
    > > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive

    > (about
    > > > 2
    > > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup

    > Exec
    > > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the

    > same
    > > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the

    > problem.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800

    > MHz
    > > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz

    > to
    > > > 114
    > > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and

    > the
    > > > PCI
    > > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like

    > messing
    > > > with
    > > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any

    > help
    > > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > > >
    > > > >

    > >



  8. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    I'm still not convinced that it is a fast CPU problem strictly. Could it be
    a fast CPU running Win95 issue? THIS would not surprise me. Do you have
    any other form of backup software? When I had problems with Backup Exec
    Desktop, on my CD-ROM burner, I tried using Nero (a CD-ROM burner
    application), to see if it was Veritas.

    Please don't mistake the tone of messages; I'm not trying to dismiss your
    observations. If there is a problem with Backup Exec on fast CPUs, I want
    to know about it. For all I know, I've been lucky so far.

    Have you tried contacting Veritas tech. support? I found them to be VERY
    willing to help.

    "Grasser" wrote in message
    news:3AC13CAB.1383F9E2@erols.com...
    > The problem was noticed when backing up to a 6 month old hard drive. I am
    > pretty much convinced that it is the Backup software. I am curious why

    only
    > about five other people have noticed it and also why Veritas is not

    addressing
    > it.
    >
    > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    >
    > > How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.
    > >
    > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > > > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem occurs with

    > > random
    > > > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem is due to

    > > data
    > > > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not concern

    me.
    > > >
    > > > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately installed

    > > Windows 95
    > > > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    > > >
    > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential

    restore; I
    > > have
    > > > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even after

    being
    > > > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger fish

    to
    > > fry,
    > > > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > > > >
    > > > > Niels
    > > > >
    > > > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off while

    > > doing
    > > > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone jobs

    > > because
    > > > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are running

    > > faster
    > > > > than
    > > > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even after

    > > turning it
    > > > > > off, what do you do?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a

    > > 1.5GHz
    > > > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I

    get
    > > > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after

    I
    > > turn
    > > > > it
    > > > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)?

    Are
    > > > > there
    > > > > > > any programs that are running in the background during your

    backups?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a

    400
    > > MHz
    > > > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a

    full
    > > > > system
    > > > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions

    to a
    > > > > file
    > > > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my

    backups
    > > to
    > > > > disk
    > > > > > > > would always complete the verification step without errors.

    After
    > > > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that

    do
    > > not
    > > > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of

    verification
    > > > > errors
    > > > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I

    spent
    > > a
    > > > > week
    > > > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel,

    > > Maxtor
    > > > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data

    > > corruption
    > > > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk

    diagnostic
    > > and a
    > > > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a

    > > homemade
    > > > > test
    > > > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive

    > > (about
    > > > > 2
    > > > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running

    Backup
    > > Exec
    > > > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the

    > > same
    > > > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the

    > > problem.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at

    800
    > > MHz
    > > > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133

    MHz
    > > to
    > > > > 114
    > > > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before

    and
    > > the
    > > > > PCI
    > > > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like

    > > messing
    > > > > with
    > > > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem.

    Any
    > > help
    > > > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > >

    >




  9. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    I recently purchased Win 98SE but haven't installed it yet since many of my
    programs are not compatible with it. I may install a version of it on a free
    partition and put BE on it to see if the problem goes away.

    I haven't called tech support yet, but I probably should. Thanks.

    Niels Kistrup wrote:

    > I'm still not convinced that it is a fast CPU problem strictly. Could it be
    > a fast CPU running Win95 issue? THIS would not surprise me. Do you have
    > any other form of backup software? When I had problems with Backup Exec
    > Desktop, on my CD-ROM burner, I tried using Nero (a CD-ROM burner
    > application), to see if it was Veritas.
    >
    > Please don't mistake the tone of messages; I'm not trying to dismiss your
    > observations. If there is a problem with Backup Exec on fast CPUs, I want
    > to know about it. For all I know, I've been lucky so far.
    >
    > Have you tried contacting Veritas tech. support? I found them to be VERY
    > willing to help.
    >
    > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > news:3AC13CAB.1383F9E2@erols.com...
    > > The problem was noticed when backing up to a 6 month old hard drive. I am
    > > pretty much convinced that it is the Backup software. I am curious why

    > only
    > > about five other people have noticed it and also why Veritas is not

    > addressing
    > > it.
    > >
    > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > >
    > > > How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.
    > > >
    > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > > > > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem occurs with
    > > > random
    > > > > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem is due to
    > > > data
    > > > > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not concern

    > me.
    > > > >
    > > > > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately installed
    > > > Windows 95
    > > > > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    > > > >
    > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential

    > restore; I
    > > > have
    > > > > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even after

    > being
    > > > > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger fish

    > to
    > > > fry,
    > > > > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Niels
    > > > > >
    > > > > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > > > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off while
    > > > doing
    > > > > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone jobs
    > > > because
    > > > > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are running
    > > > faster
    > > > > > than
    > > > > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even after
    > > > turning it
    > > > > > > off, what do you do?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R on a
    > > > 1.5GHz
    > > > > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet. I

    > get
    > > > > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even after

    > I
    > > > turn
    > > > > > it
    > > > > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking software)?

    > Are
    > > > > > there
    > > > > > > > any programs that are running in the background during your

    > backups?
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a

    > 400
    > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a

    > full
    > > > > > system
    > > > > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions

    > to a
    > > > > > file
    > > > > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my

    > backups
    > > > to
    > > > > > disk
    > > > > > > > > would always complete the verification step without errors.

    > After
    > > > > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that

    > do
    > > > not
    > > > > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of

    > verification
    > > > > > errors
    > > > > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I

    > spent
    > > > a
    > > > > > week
    > > > > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel,
    > > > Maxtor
    > > > > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data
    > > > corruption
    > > > > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk

    > diagnostic
    > > > and a
    > > > > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a
    > > > homemade
    > > > > > test
    > > > > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive
    > > > (about
    > > > > > 2
    > > > > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running

    > Backup
    > > > Exec
    > > > > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the
    > > > same
    > > > > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the
    > > > problem.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at

    > 800
    > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133

    > MHz
    > > > to
    > > > > > 114
    > > > > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before

    > and
    > > > the
    > > > > > PCI
    > > > > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like
    > > > messing
    > > > > > with
    > > > > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem.

    > Any
    > > > help
    > > > > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > >

    > >



  10. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    Good luck. I'm in the process of replacing Norton Personal Firewall with
    ZoneAlarm. It will be interesting to if that eliminates the problem on my
    machine.

    "Grasser" wrote in message
    news:3AC53516.5BA90F82@erols.com...
    > I recently purchased Win 98SE but haven't installed it yet since many of

    my
    > programs are not compatible with it. I may install a version of it on a

    free
    > partition and put BE on it to see if the problem goes away.
    >
    > I haven't called tech support yet, but I probably should. Thanks.
    >
    > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    >
    > > I'm still not convinced that it is a fast CPU problem strictly. Could

    it be
    > > a fast CPU running Win95 issue? THIS would not surprise me. Do you

    have
    > > any other form of backup software? When I had problems with Backup Exec
    > > Desktop, on my CD-ROM burner, I tried using Nero (a CD-ROM burner
    > > application), to see if it was Veritas.
    > >
    > > Please don't mistake the tone of messages; I'm not trying to dismiss

    your
    > > observations. If there is a problem with Backup Exec on fast CPUs, I

    want
    > > to know about it. For all I know, I've been lucky so far.
    > >
    > > Have you tried contacting Veritas tech. support? I found them to be

    VERY
    > > willing to help.
    > >
    > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > news:3AC13CAB.1383F9E2@erols.com...
    > > > The problem was noticed when backing up to a 6 month old hard drive.

    I am
    > > > pretty much convinced that it is the Backup software. I am curious

    why
    > > only
    > > > about five other people have noticed it and also why Veritas is not

    > > addressing
    > > > it.
    > > >
    > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.
    > > > >
    > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > > > > > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem occurs

    with
    > > > > random
    > > > > > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem is

    due to
    > > > > data
    > > > > > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not

    concern
    > > me.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately

    installed
    > > > > Windows 95
    > > > > > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential

    > > restore; I
    > > > > have
    > > > > > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even

    after
    > > being
    > > > > > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger

    fish
    > > to
    > > > > fry,
    > > > > > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Niels
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > > > > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > > > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off

    while
    > > > > doing
    > > > > > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone

    jobs
    > > > > because
    > > > > > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are

    running
    > > > > faster
    > > > > > > than
    > > > > > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even

    after
    > > > > turning it
    > > > > > > > off, what do you do?
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R

    on a
    > > > > 1.5GHz
    > > > > > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet.

    I
    > > get
    > > > > > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even

    after
    > > I
    > > > > turn
    > > > > > > it
    > > > > > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking

    software)?
    > > Are
    > > > > > > there
    > > > > > > > > any programs that are running in the background during your

    > > backups?
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU

    from a
    > > 400
    > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do

    a
    > > full
    > > > > > > system
    > > > > > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk

    partitions
    > > to a
    > > > > > > file
    > > > > > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my

    > > backups
    > > > > to
    > > > > > > disk
    > > > > > > > > > would always complete the verification step without

    errors.
    > > After
    > > > > > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files

    that
    > > do
    > > > > not
    > > > > > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of

    > > verification
    > > > > > > errors
    > > > > > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so

    I
    > > spent
    > > > > a
    > > > > > > week
    > > > > > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted

    Intel,
    > > > > Maxtor
    > > > > > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data
    > > > > corruption
    > > > > > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk

    > > diagnostic
    > > > > and a
    > > > > > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a
    > > > > homemade
    > > > > > > test
    > > > > > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to

    drive
    > > > > (about
    > > > > > > 2
    > > > > > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running

    > > Backup
    > > > > Exec
    > > > > > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits

    the
    > > > > same
    > > > > > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up

    the
    > > > > problem.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run

    at
    > > 800
    > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from

    133
    > > MHz
    > > > > to
    > > > > > > 114
    > > > > > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than

    before
    > > and
    > > > > the
    > > > > > > PCI
    > > > > > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not

    like
    > > > > messing
    > > > > > > with
    > > > > > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the

    problem.
    > > Any
    > > > > help
    > > > > > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > >

    >




  11. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    This weekend, I installed Win 98SE and BE 4.5. I am seeing the same symptoms.
    Verify errors when running at 933 MHz, no errors when running at 800 MHz. I did
    not install the Busmaster drivers this time. I am using the native Win 98
    drivers.

    Niels Kistrup wrote:

    > Good luck. I'm in the process of replacing Norton Personal Firewall with
    > ZoneAlarm. It will be interesting to if that eliminates the problem on my
    > machine.
    >
    > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > news:3AC53516.5BA90F82@erols.com...
    > > I recently purchased Win 98SE but haven't installed it yet since many of

    > my
    > > programs are not compatible with it. I may install a version of it on a

    > free
    > > partition and put BE on it to see if the problem goes away.
    > >
    > > I haven't called tech support yet, but I probably should. Thanks.
    > >
    > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > >
    > > > I'm still not convinced that it is a fast CPU problem strictly. Could

    > it be
    > > > a fast CPU running Win95 issue? THIS would not surprise me. Do you

    > have
    > > > any other form of backup software? When I had problems with Backup Exec
    > > > Desktop, on my CD-ROM burner, I tried using Nero (a CD-ROM burner
    > > > application), to see if it was Veritas.
    > > >
    > > > Please don't mistake the tone of messages; I'm not trying to dismiss

    > your
    > > > observations. If there is a problem with Backup Exec on fast CPUs, I

    > want
    > > > to know about it. For all I know, I've been lucky so far.
    > > >
    > > > Have you tried contacting Veritas tech. support? I found them to be

    > VERY
    > > > willing to help.
    > > >
    > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > news:3AC13CAB.1383F9E2@erols.com...
    > > > > The problem was noticed when backing up to a 6 month old hard drive.

    > I am
    > > > > pretty much convinced that it is the Backup software. I am curious

    > why
    > > > only
    > > > > about five other people have noticed it and also why Veritas is not
    > > > addressing
    > > > > it.
    > > > >
    > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > > > > > > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem occurs

    > with
    > > > > > random
    > > > > > > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem is

    > due to
    > > > > > data
    > > > > > > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not

    > concern
    > > > me.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately

    > installed
    > > > > > Windows 95
    > > > > > > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential
    > > > restore; I
    > > > > > have
    > > > > > > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even

    > after
    > > > being
    > > > > > > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have bigger

    > fish
    > > > to
    > > > > > fry,
    > > > > > > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Niels
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > > > > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it off

    > while
    > > > > > doing
    > > > > > > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as standalone

    > jobs
    > > > > > because
    > > > > > > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are

    > running
    > > > > > faster
    > > > > > > > than
    > > > > > > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even

    > after
    > > > > > turning it
    > > > > > > > > off, what do you do?
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x CD-R

    > on a
    > > > > > 1.5GHz
    > > > > > > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . . yet.

    > I
    > > > get
    > > > > > > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall (even

    > after
    > > > I
    > > > > > turn
    > > > > > > > it
    > > > > > > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking

    > software)?
    > > > Are
    > > > > > > > there
    > > > > > > > > > any programs that are running in the background during your
    > > > backups?
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU

    > from a
    > > > 400
    > > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do

    > a
    > > > full
    > > > > > > > system
    > > > > > > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk

    > partitions
    > > > to a
    > > > > > > > file
    > > > > > > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my
    > > > backups
    > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > disk
    > > > > > > > > > > would always complete the verification step without

    > errors.
    > > > After
    > > > > > > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files

    > that
    > > > do
    > > > > > not
    > > > > > > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of
    > > > verification
    > > > > > > > errors
    > > > > > > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so

    > I
    > > > spent
    > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > week
    > > > > > > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted

    > Intel,
    > > > > > Maxtor
    > > > > > > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data
    > > > > > corruption
    > > > > > > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk
    > > > diagnostic
    > > > > > and a
    > > > > > > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a
    > > > > > homemade
    > > > > > > > test
    > > > > > > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to

    > drive
    > > > > > (about
    > > > > > > > 2
    > > > > > > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running
    > > > Backup
    > > > > > Exec
    > > > > > > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits

    > the
    > > > > > same
    > > > > > > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up

    > the
    > > > > > problem.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run

    > at
    > > > 800
    > > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from

    > 133
    > > > MHz
    > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > 114
    > > > > > > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than

    > before
    > > > and
    > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > PCI
    > > > > > > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not

    > like
    > > > > > messing
    > > > > > > > with
    > > > > > > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the

    > problem.
    > > > Any
    > > > > > help
    > > > > > > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > >

    > >



  12. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    Could it have something to do with Win98? (No idea; just guessing.) When I
    was shopping for a new machine, Win98 & WinME were to be avoided at all
    costs.

    Niels

    "Grasser" wrote in message
    news:3AC91009.F5B0F687@erols.com...
    > This weekend, I installed Win 98SE and BE 4.5. I am seeing the same

    symptoms.
    > Verify errors when running at 933 MHz, no errors when running at 800 MHz.

    I did
    > not install the Busmaster drivers this time. I am using the native Win 98
    > drivers.
    >
    > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    >
    > > Good luck. I'm in the process of replacing Norton Personal Firewall

    with
    > > ZoneAlarm. It will be interesting to if that eliminates the problem on

    my
    > > machine.
    > >
    > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > news:3AC53516.5BA90F82@erols.com...
    > > > I recently purchased Win 98SE but haven't installed it yet since many

    of
    > > my
    > > > programs are not compatible with it. I may install a version of it on

    a
    > > free
    > > > partition and put BE on it to see if the problem goes away.
    > > >
    > > > I haven't called tech support yet, but I probably should. Thanks.
    > > >
    > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > I'm still not convinced that it is a fast CPU problem strictly.

    Could
    > > it be
    > > > > a fast CPU running Win95 issue? THIS would not surprise me. Do you

    > > have
    > > > > any other form of backup software? When I had problems with Backup

    Exec
    > > > > Desktop, on my CD-ROM burner, I tried using Nero (a CD-ROM burner
    > > > > application), to see if it was Veritas.
    > > > >
    > > > > Please don't mistake the tone of messages; I'm not trying to dismiss

    > > your
    > > > > observations. If there is a problem with Backup Exec on fast CPUs,

    I
    > > want
    > > > > to know about it. For all I know, I've been lucky so far.
    > > > >
    > > > > Have you tried contacting Veritas tech. support? I found them to be

    > > VERY
    > > > > willing to help.
    > > > >
    > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > news:3AC13CAB.1383F9E2@erols.com...
    > > > > > The problem was noticed when backing up to a 6 month old hard

    drive.
    > > I am
    > > > > > pretty much convinced that it is the Backup software. I am

    curious
    > > why
    > > > > only
    > > > > > about five other people have noticed it and also why Veritas is

    not
    > > > > addressing
    > > > > > it.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem

    occurs
    > > with
    > > > > > > random
    > > > > > > > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem

    is
    > > due to
    > > > > > > data
    > > > > > > > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not

    > > concern
    > > > > me.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately

    > > installed
    > > > > > > Windows 95
    > > > > > > > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential
    > > > > restore; I
    > > > > > > have
    > > > > > > > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even

    > > after
    > > > > being
    > > > > > > > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have

    bigger
    > > fish
    > > > > to
    > > > > > > fry,
    > > > > > > > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Niels
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > > > > > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it

    off
    > > while
    > > > > > > doing
    > > > > > > > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as

    standalone
    > > jobs
    > > > > > > because
    > > > > > > > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are

    > > running
    > > > > > > faster
    > > > > > > > > than
    > > > > > > > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even

    > > after
    > > > > > > turning it
    > > > > > > > > > off, what do you do?
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x

    CD-R
    > > on a
    > > > > > > 1.5GHz
    > > > > > > > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . .

    yet.
    > > I
    > > > > get
    > > > > > > > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall

    (even
    > > after
    > > > > I
    > > > > > > turn
    > > > > > > > > it
    > > > > > > > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking

    > > software)?
    > > > > Are
    > > > > > > > > there
    > > > > > > > > > > any programs that are running in the background during

    your
    > > > > backups?
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU

    > > from a
    > > > > 400
    > > > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I

    do
    > > a
    > > > > full
    > > > > > > > > system
    > > > > > > > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk

    > > partitions
    > > > > to a
    > > > > > > > > file
    > > > > > > > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU,

    my
    > > > > backups
    > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > disk
    > > > > > > > > > > > would always complete the verification step without

    > > errors.
    > > > > After
    > > > > > > > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more)

    files
    > > that
    > > > > do
    > > > > > > not
    > > > > > > > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of
    > > > > verification
    > > > > > > > > errors
    > > > > > > > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame,

    so
    > > I
    > > > > spent
    > > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > > week
    > > > > > > > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I

    contacted
    > > Intel,
    > > > > > > Maxtor
    > > > > > > > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any

    data
    > > > > > > corruption
    > > > > > > > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk
    > > > > diagnostic
    > > > > > > and a
    > > > > > > > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even

    tried a
    > > > > > > homemade
    > > > > > > > > test
    > > > > > > > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive

    to
    > > drive
    > > > > > > (about
    > > > > > > > > 2
    > > > > > > > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was

    running
    > > > > Backup
    > > > > > > Exec
    > > > > > > > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this

    exhibits
    > > the
    > > > > > > same
    > > > > > > > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear

    up
    > > the
    > > > > > > problem.
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to

    run
    > > at
    > > > > 800
    > > > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock

    from
    > > 133
    > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > 114
    > > > > > > > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than

    > > before
    > > > > and
    > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > PCI
    > > > > > > > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not

    > > like
    > > > > > > messing
    > > > > > > > > with
    > > > > > > > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the

    > > problem.
    > > > > Any
    > > > > > > help
    > > > > > > > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > >

    >




  13. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    I had the same Verify failures after switching from a 300mhz cpu to a 700mhz
    cpu. Veritas tech told my tape drive was too old. I switched to CDRW
    backups. Now I get writing errors once in a while.
    "Grasser" wrote in message
    news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz
    > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    >
    > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full system
    > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a file
    > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups to disk
    > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do not
    > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification errors
    > than I am used to getting as well.
    >
    > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent a week
    > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel, Maxtor
    > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data corruption
    > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic and a
    > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a homemade test
    > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive (about 2
    > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    >
    > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup Exec
    > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the same
    > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the problem.
    >
    > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800 MHz
    > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz to 114
    > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and the PCI
    > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like messing with
    > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any help
    > will be greatly appreciated.
    >




  14. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    I know that the problem is not related to my tape drive because I get the verify
    errors when backing up to a file on a hard drive. I have used 3 different hard
    drives and 5 different 80 wire IDE cables. I am pretty much convinced that the
    problem is with the Backup Exec Software. The only question is whether or not I
    feel like changing my CPU clock each time I do a backup.

    When scanning the other messages in this newsgroup, I found 6 other posts that
    mentioned similar problems, so I know I'm not alone.

    Frank wrote:

    > I had the same Verify failures after switching from a 300mhz cpu to a 700mhz
    > cpu. Veritas tech told my tape drive was too old. I switched to CDRW
    > backups. Now I get writing errors once in a while.
    > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU from a 400 MHz
    > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > >
    > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I do a full system
    > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk partitions to a file
    > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU, my backups to disk
    > > would always complete the verification step without errors. After
    > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more) files that do not
    > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of verification errors
    > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > >
    > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame, so I spent a week
    > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I contacted Intel, Maxtor
    > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any data corruption
    > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk diagnostic and a
    > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even tried a homemade test
    > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive to drive (about 2
    > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > >
    > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was running Backup Exec
    > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this exhibits the same
    > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear up the problem.
    > >
    > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to run at 800 MHz
    > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock from 133 MHz to 114
    > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than before and the PCI
    > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not like messing with
    > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the problem. Any help
    > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > >



  15. Re: Backup Exec Data Corruption on Fast CPUs

    No it is not unique to Win 98SE. I originally saw the problem on Win 95B. I
    tried installing Win98 to see if the problem would go away with a newer
    operating system.

    Niels Kistrup wrote:

    > Could it have something to do with Win98? (No idea; just guessing.) When I
    > was shopping for a new machine, Win98 & WinME were to be avoided at all
    > costs.
    >
    > Niels
    >
    > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > news:3AC91009.F5B0F687@erols.com...
    > > This weekend, I installed Win 98SE and BE 4.5. I am seeing the same

    > symptoms.
    > > Verify errors when running at 933 MHz, no errors when running at 800 MHz.

    > I did
    > > not install the Busmaster drivers this time. I am using the native Win 98
    > > drivers.
    > >
    > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > >
    > > > Good luck. I'm in the process of replacing Norton Personal Firewall

    > with
    > > > ZoneAlarm. It will be interesting to if that eliminates the problem on

    > my
    > > > machine.
    > > >
    > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > news:3AC53516.5BA90F82@erols.com...
    > > > > I recently purchased Win 98SE but haven't installed it yet since many

    > of
    > > > my
    > > > > programs are not compatible with it. I may install a version of it on

    > a
    > > > free
    > > > > partition and put BE on it to see if the problem goes away.
    > > > >
    > > > > I haven't called tech support yet, but I probably should. Thanks.
    > > > >
    > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > I'm still not convinced that it is a fast CPU problem strictly.

    > Could
    > > > it be
    > > > > > a fast CPU running Win95 issue? THIS would not surprise me. Do you
    > > > have
    > > > > > any other form of backup software? When I had problems with Backup

    > Exec
    > > > > > Desktop, on my CD-ROM burner, I tried using Nero (a CD-ROM burner
    > > > > > application), to see if it was Veritas.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Please don't mistake the tone of messages; I'm not trying to dismiss
    > > > your
    > > > > > observations. If there is a problem with Backup Exec on fast CPUs,

    > I
    > > > want
    > > > > > to know about it. For all I know, I've been lucky so far.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Have you tried contacting Veritas tech. support? I found them to be
    > > > VERY
    > > > > > willing to help.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > news:3AC13CAB.1383F9E2@erols.com...
    > > > > > > The problem was noticed when backing up to a 6 month old hard

    > drive.
    > > > I am
    > > > > > > pretty much convinced that it is the Backup software. I am

    > curious
    > > > why
    > > > > > only
    > > > > > > about five other people have noticed it and also why Veritas is

    > not
    > > > > > addressing
    > > > > > > it.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > How old is your tape drive? I wonder if it's the tape drive.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > news:3ABFBB46.92AAA386@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > > Your problem seems different than mine then. My problem

    > occurs
    > > > with
    > > > > > > > random
    > > > > > > > > files, it is purely data corruption. I believe your problem

    > is
    > > > due to
    > > > > > > > data
    > > > > > > > > changing between the backup and the compare. That would not
    > > > concern
    > > > > > me.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > By the way, I am running Windows 95. I have 3 separately
    > > > installed
    > > > > > > > Windows 95
    > > > > > > > > partitions which all exhibit the same problem. Good luck.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Since Firewall files are unlikely candidates for a potential
    > > > > > restore; I
    > > > > > > > have
    > > > > > > > > > been allowing it to slide. But it does annoy me that, even
    > > > after
    > > > > > being
    > > > > > > > > > turned off, it is still problematic. Right now, I have

    > bigger
    > > > fish
    > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > fry,
    > > > > > > > > > but eventually I'll bug Symmantac about the problem.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Niels
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > "adam thodey" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > > news:3ABF71B5.DC02AE9A@inorbit.com...
    > > > > > > > > > > I am using the McAfee Virus Scan, but I usually turn it

    > off
    > > > while
    > > > > > > > doing
    > > > > > > > > > > backups and compares. I always run my backups as

    > standalone
    > > > jobs
    > > > > > > > because
    > > > > > > > > > > other software may affect the compare. You definitely are
    > > > running
    > > > > > > > faster
    > > > > > > > > > than
    > > > > > > > > > > me, so I wonder what the problem is.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > If Norton Personal Firewall causes your miscompares, even
    > > > after
    > > > > > > > turning it
    > > > > > > > > > > off, what do you do?
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Niels Kistrup wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > I using a SCSI-2 Travan 4 tape drive AND a SCSI-2 12x

    > CD-R
    > > > on a
    > > > > > > > 1.5GHz
    > > > > > > > > > > > Pentium IV, and I have NOT seen any such problem . . .

    > yet.
    > > > I
    > > > > > get
    > > > > > > > > > > > verification failures from Norton Personal Firewall

    > (even
    > > > after
    > > > > > I
    > > > > > > > turn
    > > > > > > > > > it
    > > > > > > > > > > > off). Are you running NAV (or other virus checking
    > > > software)?
    > > > > > Are
    > > > > > > > > > there
    > > > > > > > > > > > any programs that are running in the background during

    > your
    > > > > > backups?
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > "Grasser" wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > > > > news:3ABE0A71.C632D301@erols.com...
    > > > > > > > > > > > > I noticed the following problem after upgrading my CPU
    > > > from a
    > > > > > 400
    > > > > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > > > > Celeron to a Pentium III 933 MHz!
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > I run the Backup Exec very frequently. Once a month I

    > do
    > > > a
    > > > > > full
    > > > > > > > > > system
    > > > > > > > > > > > > backup to tape. Once a day, I backup certain disk
    > > > partitions
    > > > > > to a
    > > > > > > > > > file
    > > > > > > > > > > > > on different hard drive. Prior to upgrading the CPU,

    > my
    > > > > > backups
    > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > disk
    > > > > > > > > > > > > would always complete the verification step without
    > > > errors.
    > > > > > After
    > > > > > > > > > > > > upgrading, I get at least 2 (sometimes 10 or more)

    > files
    > > > that
    > > > > > do
    > > > > > > > not
    > > > > > > > > > > > > verify. My backups to tape have a higher number of
    > > > > > verification
    > > > > > > > > > errors
    > > > > > > > > > > > > than I am used to getting as well.
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > My original concern was that my hardware was to blame,

    > so
    > > > I
    > > > > > spent
    > > > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > > > week
    > > > > > > > > > > > > and a half searching various newsgroups and I

    > contacted
    > > > Intel,
    > > > > > > > Maxtor
    > > > > > > > > > > > > (disk), and VIA (chipset) but no one was aware of any

    > data
    > > > > > > > corruption
    > > > > > > > > > > > > issues. I ran a memory burn-in test, CPU test, disk
    > > > > > diagnostic
    > > > > > > > and a
    > > > > > > > > > > > > system burn-in test and everything passes. I even

    > tried a
    > > > > > > > homemade
    > > > > > > > > > test
    > > > > > > > > > > > > where I copied whole disk drive partitions from drive

    > to
    > > > drive
    > > > > > > > (about
    > > > > > > > > > 2
    > > > > > > > > > > > > GB of data) and there was no data corruption.
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > This leads me to suspect the Backup Exec! I was

    > running
    > > > > > Backup
    > > > > > > > Exec
    > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.0b so I purchased the Backup Exec 4.5, but this

    > exhibits
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > same
    > > > > > > > > > > > > symptoms. Running with compression off does not clear

    > up
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > problem.
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > What does seem to work is underclocking my system to

    > run
    > > > at
    > > > > > 800
    > > > > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > > > > > > instead of 933 MHz. This is changing the FSB clock

    > from
    > > > 133
    > > > > > MHz
    > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > 114
    > > > > > > > > > > > > MHz. This means that the CPU is running slower than
    > > > before
    > > > > > and
    > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > PCI
    > > > > > > > > > > > > bus is clocked about 12% faster than before. I do not
    > > > like
    > > > > > > > messing
    > > > > > > > > > with
    > > > > > > > > > > > > the system clock speed, so I would like to fix the
    > > > problem.
    > > > > > Any
    > > > > > > > help
    > > > > > > > > > > > > will be greatly appreciated.
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > >

    > >



+ Reply to Thread