This forum is closed to new posts and responses. Individual names altered for privacy purposes. The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a forum for customer support requests. Any customer support requests should be directed to the official HCL customer support channels below:

HCL Software Customer Support Portal for U.S. Federal Government clients
HCL Software Customer Support Portal


Nov 24, 2015, 5:22 PM
41 Posts

Archiving on server via policy

  • Category: Domino Server
  • Platform: Windows
  • Release: 9.0.1
  • Role: Administrator
  • Tags:
  • Replies: 10

When we upgraded to 9.01 in July, we decided to start archiving all email on the server by using an explicit policy.

We set up the policy and criteria and scheduled "compact mail -a" to run every Saturday.

I never checked it again until recently, and noticed that only 7 of the 17 users assigned this policy under policy assignment actually had archive databases created and were actively archiving weekly.

The policy seems to work fine when it is working, and on the workstations where it is not working, you can see that the policy is in place - as you can't change any settings from the workstation. The settings are locked and match the server policy information.

However, no archiving is taking place on these 10 workstations.

I tried running "load compact mail\xxxxx.nsf -a" for one of these databases, but got "Error archiving documents from mail\xxxxx.nsf: Entry not found in index"

I am a part-time admin, with limited experience, so any help that could be offered is appreciated!

Nov 25, 2015, 2:00 PM
5 Posts
Possible Database Corruption
Checking on this error message when running compact -a on the problematic database, it could be corrupted that is why it is being skipped. I would suggest performing database maintenance( fixup -f, compact -c -d -i and updall -r) on these databases to fix it. You can create a backup first before performing the maintenance. Once done, you can try and run the archiving to check if it work.
Nov 25, 2015, 7:51 PM
41 Posts
re: Archiving on server via policy

Either it isn't database corruption, or the steps suggested didn't fix the corruption.

I ran the suggested commands on one of the databases to completion, and then tried compact -a on it, and same error.

"Error archiving documents from mail\xxxxx.nsf: Entry not found in index"

Any other ideas?

Nov 26, 2015, 1:17 PM
5 Posts
Enable debug for archiving
If database maintenance did not solve the issue, I would recommend enabling debug for archiving for you to see more details why the archiving is not working. You can access this link for more information:

http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21313174

Once done enabling the debug, you can perform the archiving again and check the logs created. You can upload the logs here so that we can analyze.
Nov 27, 2015, 8:51 PM
41 Posts
re: Archiving on server via policy

Here is output from console when trying to run archiving from the server. Debug level 10
The mail file is at \mail\xxxxx.nsf
The archive file is at \archive\a_xxxxx.nsf
Archive settings are to archive on the server - filenames look like they match.

load compact mail\xxxxx.nsf -a
[03A0:008A-0428] 11/27/2015 02:23:41 PM  Remote console command issued by xxxxx: load compact mail\xxxxx.nsf -a
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:43.46 PM Archiving> Calling NAMEGetPolicy for CN=xxxxx/O=POWER&MINE
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:43 PM  Archiving documents from mail\xxxxx.nsf (xxxxx)
[1730:0004-1EF4] TestNoteForArchiveSelection> Adding note 624738 (98862) as entry 158
[1730:0004-1EF4] TestNoteForArchiveSelection> note 624734 (9885E) is deleted/ghosted
[1730:0004-1EF4] TestNoteForArchiveSelection> Adding note 624742 (98866) as entry 159
[1730:0004-1EF4] TestNoteForArchiveSelection> Adding note 624746 (9886A) as entry 160
<snip> lots of similiar entries - no errors, then...
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:49.78 PM Archiving> Adding parent id 612814 of noteID 612818 to Ancestors
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:49.78 PM Archiving> create time of note 612814 (0x959CE) is 04/07/2011 05:39:10 PM
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:49.78 PM Archiving> create time from criteria is 11/27/2013 02:23:43 PM
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:49.78 PM Archiving> note 612814 (0x959CE) is a candidate based upon create time
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:49.78 PM Archiving> ARCHIVE: adding noteID 612814 to Match
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:49.78 PM Archiving> create time of note 612826 (0x959DA) is 04/08/2011 06:59:37 AM
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:49.78 PM Archiving> create time from criteria is 11/27/2013 02:23:43 PM
<snip> lots of similiar entries - no errors, then...
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:50.26 PM Archiving> Error getting archive notes: Entry not found in index
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:50.26 PM Archiving> Error selecting documents for archiving, pruning and deleting: Entry not found in index
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:50.31 PM Archiving> Exiting V6 archiving process
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:50 PM  Error archiving documents from mail\xxxxx.nsf: Entry not found in index
[1730:0004-1EF4] 11/27/2015 02:23:50 PM  Compacting mail\xxxxx.nsf (xxxxx),  mail\xxxxx.nsf -a

Nov 30, 2015, 1:12 PM
5 Posts
No Issue in the archiving
As what I can see on the logs, the archiving is actually working. The only problem here is there's something that's causing the archiving to not push through.

Please try the following if applicable:

1. Create a new replica of the mail file. Perform archive in new replica. Did the archiving works?

2. Create a new copy of the mail file. Same steps with no. 1. Did the arching work?

3. If there is a backup copy, replace it for the mean time and perform archiving. Did it work?

Mar 30, 2016, 1:02 PM
1 Posts
Try changing archive selection criteria

Try changing archive selection criteria. I got rid off error after changing from "older than" to "not modified in more than". Also archiving worked then manual selection of views or folders.

Jan 18, 2017, 9:33 AM
1 Posts
Bad creation date

We're facing the same issue here since 9.0.1 is in production. What I can say so far: There are meeting related documents which have no or a a damaged "creation date" (view the document's property: Creation date is blank). Why? No idea so far.
Please find below the Lotus Script code we send as button within a mail to the affected users. Afterwards users have to check the documents found to not delete any meetings in the future from their calendar. After deleting all damaged documents, archiving is working again.

 

' Lotus Script send as button within a mail

Dim s As New NotesSession
Dim viwApptUNID As NotesView
Dim docol As NotesDocumentCollection
Dim doc As NotesDocument


'    Set viwApptUNID
Set viwApptUNID = s.CurrentDatabase.GetView("$ApptUNID")
If viwApptUNID Is Nothing Then Msgbox "Cannot find view '$ApptUNID'"

'    Set docol
Set docol = s.CurrentDatabase.CreateDocumentCollection

'    Loop through all docs in view
Set doc = viwApptUNID.GetFirstDocument
While Not doc Is Nothing
If Instr(Join(Evaluate("@Text(@Created; S2)", doc)), "*") > 0 Then Call docol.AddDocument(doc)    ' @Created is save here, Document.Created sometimes delivers a date valid formatted but containing crypted components
Set doc = viwApptUNID.GetNextDocument(doc)
Wend    ' Not doc Is Nothing

'    Handle result
If docol.Count > 0 Then
Call docol.PutAllInFolder("aaa_BAD_CreationDate")
' Call docol.RemoveAll(true)    ' Hard deletes all documents found. Used only in case the documents cannot be deleted through UI
Msgbox Cstr(docol.Count) & " damaged calendar entries found and moved to folder 'aaa_BAD_CreationDate'"
Else
Msgbox "No damaged calendar entries found."
End If

Jan 24, 2017, 1:51 PM
1 Posts
No need to avoid "not modified for" conditions

The issue is caused by document that are missing a creation date when an archive condition "older than xxx" is used.

Typically calendar updates from external sources are affected, I suspect a bug in the iCal conversion routine.

@Alexander:

Using "not modified for 6 month" will work fine for you, you don't have to worry about old calendar entries being archived. The only difference is, that the cut-over date is less precisely calculated.

Using "older than" or "not modified for" makes basically no difference. Anything older than the cut-over age is archived, which is simply calculated in a slightly different way.

Being archived does not imply being deleted from the archived database. To be deleted after an archive run, the document must match several conditions:

- It must not have child documents that are not also archived (replies, calendar repeats and so on),

- It must not have a $NoPurge Field set. $NoPurge contains a target date how long the document is required in the database

- It must not be a design element, ACL entry or profile document. These are always archived and never deleted.

Stationaries, rules, documents marked for follow-up, repeating calendar entries and other persistent documents have $NoPurge set to indicate the earliest possible archiving date.

In your example, the repeating calendar entry will be archived after 6 months but not deleted prior to its end date plus 6 monts (the time set in the archive condition). You simply find it in the main db and in the archive simulaneously.

However your script is helpful to fix affected databases. Since you permanently have to monitor the archive process for "entry not found in index"-errors, I prefer to use "not modified for"-conditions.

Mar 17, 2017, 12:38 PM
1 Posts
the problem is the import from ics-files

When I import calendar entries from ics files, the new entries do not have a creation property.

I have the same problem with Notes-client 853FP6 and Notes 901.

Today I reported the problem to the ibm support.

 

 


This forum is closed to new posts and responses. Individual names altered for privacy purposes. The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a forum for customer support requests. Any customer support requests should be directed to the official HCL customer support channels below:

HCL Software Customer Support Portal for U.S. Federal Government clients
HCL Software Customer Support Portal