ekisner wrote:Disk corruption happens... that would be my first guess.
unsichtbarre wrote:We have also ruled out disk corruption (on the backup repository) in this case.
unsichtbarre wrote:Unfortunately, when the initial backup chain is corrupted, the Backup Copy job becomes useless!
Mapleuser wrote:I've been predicting that this could happen.
Which is why I insist on doing an active full backup regularly rather than going on forever incremental.
At least if there are any corruption, the last active full should be a good copy?
Gostev wrote:As far as Active Full, it is largely useless unless you want some extra protection from possible yet unknown hypervisor-based changed block tracking bugs...
mkaec wrote:As was mentioned in another post, hardware and software are made by people and people make mistakes. An active full operation is easier to implement than more complex operations that requiring merging. Periodic active fulls provide potential protection from bugs in the merge logic.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 21 guests