Guest arachnaut Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 I just converted ny 200GB system drive to a 1TB drive via cloning. After that when I backup in Retrospect I sometimes get an error that Open File Backup can't start. At that time an error is logged: Event Type: Error Event Source: VolSnap Event Category: None Event ID: 20 Date: 6/10/2008 Time: 11:58:36 AM User: N/A Computer: KRELL Description: The shadow copy of volume G: was aborted because of a failed free space computation. For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. Data: 0000: 00 00 00 00 02 00 58 00 ......X. 0008: 00 00 00 00 14 00 06 c0 .......À 0010: 00 00 00 00 9a 00 00 c0 ....?..À 0018: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ 0020: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ I have seen other people posting for help on this same problem in other places, but so far no one seems to have a solution other than a restart. I have Windows XP with SP3. Any ideas? It seems to me like it must have something to do with the large number of clusters on this drive.
Guest R. McCarty Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 Re: Volume Shadow Copy error in Retrospect after 1TB Disk installed XP can handle 2.0 Terabyte size drives ( volumes ) so that shouldn't be an issue. I'm not familiar with Retrospect but the Event log entry points to free space so you may want to run a Chkdsk on the volume. Other wise I'd look to retrospect for help and information. "arachnaut" <arachnaut@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:F59224F4-EB26-45F0-B8FA-376A4BCBBC8C@microsoft.com... >I just converted ny 200GB system drive to a 1TB drive via cloning. > > After that when I backup in Retrospect I sometimes get an error that > Open File Backup can't start. At that time an error is logged: > > Event Type: Error > Event Source: VolSnap > Event Category: None > Event ID: 20 > Date: 6/10/2008 > Time: 11:58:36 AM > User: N/A > Computer: KRELL > Description: > The shadow copy of volume G: was aborted because of a failed free space > computation. > > For more information, see Help and Support Center at > http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. > Data: > 0000: 00 00 00 00 02 00 58 00 ......X. > 0008: 00 00 00 00 14 00 06 c0 .......À > 0010: 00 00 00 00 9a 00 00 c0 ....?..À > 0018: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ > 0020: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ > > > > I have seen other people posting for help on this same problem in other > places, but so far no one seems to have a solution other than a restart. > > I have Windows XP with SP3. > > Any ideas? It seems to me like it must have something to do with the large > number of clusters on this drive. > > >
Guest Jim Hurley Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 Re: Volume Shadow Copy error in Retrospect after 1TB Disk installed R. McCarty wrote: > XP can handle 2.0 Terabyte size drives ( volumes ) so that shouldn't > be an issue. I'm not familiar with Retrospect but the Event log entry > points to free space so you may want to run a Chkdsk on the volume. > Other wise I'd look to retrospect for help and information. It's not that, I've run a thorough chkdsk at boot time from autochk. Retrospect says it is a VSS issue with Microsoft. VSS uses tons of non-paged memory so it may be related to the Session Manager entries. I have SystemPages set to 0xFFFFFFFF. A restart fixes the problem, but I do unattended nightly backups, so I have to remember to restart each day.
Guest Jim Hurley Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 Re: Volume Shadow Copy error in Retrospect after 1TB Disk installed I should add that this error occurs at the start of the backup. Retrospect enables VSS, then does what it calls 'Open File Backup'. When VSS fails, it does a 'normal' backup. The issue here is not the backup software nor the disk data it is something in the OS. As I said, there are many posts here and there that can be found with people asking about this, but no answers that I've been able to discover. It is also an issue with Windows Home Server, but that is something else. My number of files and their sizes and the partition data did not change except for the steps taken to re-partition them into bigger(?) clusters. I'm not sure if the cluster size changed, but it probably did.
Recommended Posts