I updated to F36 a few days ago and everything seemed to go smoothly until I noticed my regular nightly backups were failing. I use Borgbackup and the configuration has been stable for a long time with no problems. The actual backup does seem to succeed, but Borg runs a post-backup repository check that is now failing, even for backups taken before the system upgrade.
I've reported this: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?zx=60aw7rldu1gf&pli=1#inbox
poc
16.05.22, 17:45 +0200, Patrick O'Callaghan:
I updated to F36 a few days ago and everything seemed to go smoothly until I noticed my regular nightly backups were failing. I use Borgbackup and the configuration has been stable for a long time with no problems. The actual backup does seem to succeed, but Borg runs a post-backup repository check that is now failing, even for backups taken before the system upgrade.
Could be caused by the update to borg 1.2. You might want to take a look at this bug report: https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/6687
I've reported this: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?zx=60aw7rldu1gf&pli=1#inbox
I don't get where this link is supposed to lead to.
On Mon, 2022-05-16 at 18:20 +0200, Markus Schönhaber wrote:
16.05.22, 17:45 +0200, Patrick O'Callaghan:
I updated to F36 a few days ago and everything seemed to go smoothly until I noticed my regular nightly backups were failing. I use Borgbackup and the configuration has been stable for a long time with no problems. The actual backup does seem to succeed, but Borg runs a post-backup repository check that is now failing, even for backups taken before the system upgrade.
Could be caused by the update to borg 1.2. You might want to take a look at this bug report: https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/6687
I did consider that. However the upgrade to Borg 1.2 happened on April 12, weeks before the system upgrade to Fedora 36, and there were no errors in the intervening time. Also, the built-in validation check on the config file says it's all fine.
I've reported this: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?zx=60aw7rldu1gf&pli=1#inbox
I don't get where this link is supposed to lead to.
Sorry, that should have been:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2086497
poc
On Mon, 16 May 2022 20:56:10 +0100 Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2022-05-16 at 18:20 +0200, Markus Schönhaber wrote:
16.05.22, 17:45 +0200, Patrick O'Callaghan:
I updated to F36 a few days ago and everything seemed to go smoothly until I noticed my regular nightly backups were failing. I use Borgbackup and the configuration has been stable for a long time with no problems. The actual backup does seem to succeed, but Borg runs a post-backup repository check that is now failing, even for backups taken before the system upgrade.
I upgraded a laptop to F36 few days ago and borgmatic runs without error, including the check. I suspect something else is happening. Try increasing borgmatic’s verbosity to see the borg error message.
borgmatic-1.6.0 does have some breaking changes, but that is the current version for both 35 and 36.
Also, my systems are using borgbackup-1.1.17-1.fc35 and borgbackup-1.2.0-1.fc36. How did you get 1.2.0 on F35?
Jim
Could be caused by the update to borg 1.2. You might want to take a look at this bug report: https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/6687
I did consider that. However the upgrade to Borg 1.2 happened on April 12, weeks before the system upgrade to Fedora 36, and there were no errors in the intervening time. Also, the built-in validation check on the config file says it's all fine.
I've reported this: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?zx=60aw7rldu1gf&pli=1#inbox
I don't get where this link is supposed to lead to.
Sorry, that should have been:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2086497
poc _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Mon, 2022-05-16 at 16:08 -0600, James Szinger wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2022 20:56:10 +0100 Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2022-05-16 at 18:20 +0200, Markus Schönhaber wrote:
16.05.22, 17:45 +0200, Patrick O'Callaghan:
I updated to F36 a few days ago and everything seemed to go smoothly until I noticed my regular nightly backups were failing. I use Borgbackup and the configuration has been stable for a long time with no problems. The actual backup does seem to succeed, but Borg runs a post-backup repository check that is now failing, even for backups taken before the system upgrade.
I upgraded a laptop to F36 few days ago and borgmatic runs without error, including the check. I suspect something else is happening. Try increasing borgmatic’s verbosity to see the borg error message.
I may do that. However the Borg (not Borgmatic) BZ is reporting errors related to 1.2. I'm not sure it's the same thing as my errors only appeared after the F35->F36 update and I had been running Borg 1.2 before that.
borgmatic-1.6.0 does have some breaking changes, but that is the current version for both 35 and 36.
Also, my systems are using borgbackup-1.1.17-1.fc35 and borgbackup-1.2.0-1.fc36. How did you get 1.2.0 on F35?
I simply updated with dnf and there it was. Didn´t do anything special. 1.1x was the version on F35's initial release, but it changed subsequently.
poc
17.05.22, 11:48 +0200, Patrick O'Callaghan:
On Mon, 2022-05-16 at 16:08 -0600, James Szinger wrote:
Also, my systems are using borgbackup-1.1.17-1.fc35 and borgbackup-1.2.0-1.fc36. How did you get 1.2.0 on F35?
I simply updated with dnf and there it was. Didn´t do anything special. 1.1x was the version on F35's initial release, but it changed subsequently.
Hard to believe: https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/borgbackup/borgbackup/
1.1.17 is what dnf shows as available on my F35 systems.
On Tue, 2022-05-17 at 13:11 +0200, Markus Schönhaber wrote:
17.05.22, 11:48 +0200, Patrick O'Callaghan:
On Mon, 2022-05-16 at 16:08 -0600, James Szinger wrote:
Also, my systems are using borgbackup-1.1.17-1.fc35 and borgbackup-1.2.0-1.fc36. How did you get 1.2.0 on F35?
I simply updated with dnf and there it was. Didn´t do anything special. 1.1x was the version on F35's initial release, but it changed subsequently.
Hard to believe: https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/borgbackup/borgbackup/
1.1.17 is what dnf shows as available on my F35 systems.
I've looked again and you're right. The 1.2 update did come with F36 after all. Hopefully upstream will fix it.
poc
On 5/16/22 08:45, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
I updated to F36 a few days ago and everything seemed to go smoothly until I noticed my regular nightly backups were failing. I use Borgbackup and the configuration has been stable for a long time with no problems. The actual backup does seem to succeed, but Borg runs a post-backup repository check that is now failing,
That might be an indication that one of your backups was interrupted. If you're running borg on a laptop, you should take steps to make sure that the system will not suspend in the middle of a backup. I recommend using systemd-inhibit to prevent system suspending:
On Fri, 2022-05-20 at 12:12 -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 5/16/22 08:45, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
I updated to F36 a few days ago and everything seemed to go smoothly until I noticed my regular nightly backups were failing. I use Borgbackup and the configuration has been stable for a long time with no problems. The actual backup does seem to succeed, but Borg runs a post-backup repository check that is now failing,
That might be an indication that one of your backups was interrupted. If you're running borg on a laptop, you should take steps to make sure that the system will not suspend in the middle of a backup. I recommend using systemd-inhibit to prevent system suspending:
Thanks, but it's a desktop and the issue appears to be related to the latest version of Borg. The check errors happen across all of my existing backups, not just one.
poc
On 5/20/22 14:15, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Thanks, but it's a desktop and the issue appears to be related to the latest version of Borg. The check errors happen across all of my existing backups, not just one.
As a result of deduplication, it's expected that all (or most) of your backups will share blocks of data. If there's corruption in the backup data, it is not surprising that it would affect all of them and not just one.
Don't assume that the current version is broken. You've dismissed https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/6687 several times for dubious reasons. The conversation there included numerous troubleshooting steps, and I suggest you go through all of them. If you still have problems, collect a log of all of the commands you've run and the output they provided, and add that to a bug report.
On Fri, 2022-05-20 at 18:20 -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 5/20/22 14:15, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Thanks, but it's a desktop and the issue appears to be related to the latest version of Borg. The check errors happen across all of my existing backups, not just one.
As a result of deduplication, it's expected that all (or most) of your backups will share blocks of data. If there's corruption in the backup data, it is not surprising that it would affect all of them and not just one.
Don't assume that the current version is broken. You've dismissed https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/6687%C2%A0several times for dubious reasons. The conversation there included numerous troubleshooting steps, and I suggest you go through all of them. If you still have problems, collect a log of all of the commands you've run and the output they provided, and add that to a bug report.
I haven't "dismissed" anything. The significant point is that these errors only appeared on upgrading to 1.2. I'm watching that bug thread and will add to it if I can say something useful.
However I'll take your point about trying the troubleshooting steps. I haven't done so to date as my experience with Borg is limited.
poc
On Sat, 2022-05-21 at 12:32 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Fri, 2022-05-20 at 18:20 -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 5/20/22 14:15, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Thanks, but it's a desktop and the issue appears to be related to the latest version of Borg. The check errors happen across all of my existing backups, not just one.
As a result of deduplication, it's expected that all (or most) of your backups will share blocks of data. If there's corruption in the backup data, it is not surprising that it would affect all of them and not just one.
Don't assume that the current version is broken. You've dismissed https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/6687%C2%A0several times for dubious reasons. The conversation there included numerous troubleshooting steps, and I suggest you go through all of them. If you still have problems, collect a log of all of the commands you've run and the output they provided, and add that to a bug report.
I haven't "dismissed" anything. The significant point is that these errors only appeared on upgrading to 1.2. I'm watching that bug thread and will add to it if I can say something useful.
However I'll take your point about trying the troubleshooting steps. I haven't done so to date as my experience with Borg is limited.
poc
I managed to fix it using 'borg check --repair'. My backup drive is a BTRFS RAID1, so after using Btrfs to check there were no physical errors, I copied the Borg repository ('cp -R', really fast because of COW), then ran the repair. It reported a single error from an unimportant file (which presumably was causing the shower of errors due to de-duplication), and the repair fixed it.
Thanks for the various suggestions.
poc
-
Gordon Messmer -
James Szinger -
Markus Schönhaber -
Patrick O'Callaghan