Search Results

Search found 2 results on 1 pages for 'dlo'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• BackupExec errors when starting services

  - by blade

  Hi, I've installed backupexec 2010 trial on my server, with an appropriately-privileged AD account, but get errors when starting the required services from the login page: Processing services Start services on server: WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ Starting Enterprise Vault Admin Service on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. The service Enterprise Vault Admin Service is already running on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Starting Backup Exec Remote Agent for Windows Systems on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. The service Backup Exec Remote Agent for Windows Systems is already running on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Starting Backup Exec Device & Media Service on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Error starting the service Backup Exec Device & Media Service on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Service-specific error code returned: 0x2000e2d3 (536928979) Starting Backup Exec Server on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Error starting the service Backup Exec Server on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. The dependency service or group failed to start. Starting Backup Exec Job Engine on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Error starting the service Backup Exec Job Engine on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. The dependency service or group failed to start. Starting Backup Exec Agent Browser on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Error starting the service Backup Exec Agent Browser on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. The dependency service or group failed to start. Starting Backup Exec DLO Administration Service on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Error starting the service Backup Exec DLO Administration Service on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Error code returned: Starting Backup Exec DLO Maintenance Service on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. The service Backup Exec DLO Maintenance Service is already running on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Starting Backup Exec Web Service on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. The service Backup Exec Web Service is already running on WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ. Start services on server WIN-HQ7JSCRTTSQ completed. Processing services completed! How can I resolve this?

  Read the article

• Bidirectional real-time sync of large file tree between two distant linux servers

  - by dlo

  By large file tree I mean about 200k files, and growing all the time. A relatively small number of files are being changed in any given hour though. By bidirectional I mean that changes may occur on either server and need to be pushed to the other, so rsync doesn't seem appropriate. By distant I mean that the servers are both in data centers, but geographically remote from each other. Currently there are only 2 servers, but that may expand over time. By real-time, it's ok for there to be a little latency between syncing, but running a cron every 1-2 minutes doesn't seem right, since a very small fraction of files may change in any given hour, let alone minute. EDIT: This is running on VPS's so I might be limited on the kinds of kernel-level stuff I can do. Also, the VPS's are not resource-rich, so I'd shy away from solutions that require lots of ram (like Gluster?). What's the best / most "accepted" approach to get this done? This seems like it would be a common need, but I haven't been able to find a generally accepted approach yet, which was surprising. (I'm seeking the safety of the masses. :) I've come across lsyncd to trigger a sync at the filesystem change level. That seems clever though not super common, and I'm a bit confused by the various lsyncd approaches. There's just using lsyncd with rsync, but it seems this could be fragile for bidirectionality since rsync doesn't have a notion of memory (eg- to know whether a deleted file on A should be deleted on B or whether it's a new file on B that should be copied to A). lipsync appears to be just a lsyncd+rsync implementation, right? Then there's using lsyncd with csync2, like this: http://www.axivo.com/community/threads/lightning-fast-synchronization-with-csync2-and-lsyncd.121/ ... I'm leaning towards this approach, but csync2 is a little quirky, though I did do a successful test of it. I'm mostly concerned that I haven't been able to find a lot of community confirmation of this method. People on here seem to like Unison a lot, but it seems that it is no longer under active development and it's not clear that it has an automatic trigger like lsyncd. I've seen Gluster mentioned, but maybe overkill for what I need? UPDATE: fyi- I ended up going with the original solution I mentioned: lsyncd+csync2. It seems to work quite well, and I like the architectural approach of having the servers be very loosely joined, so that each server can operate indefinitely on its own regardless of the link quality between them.

  Read the article

1