Rebuild-missing-dblock-files not working?!

Hi guys.
I’ve gone through the other topics here like How do I use --rebuild-missing-dblock-files or Repair Backup Missing DBlock Files but I still can’t figure it out how to use this.

Here’s my situation:
One dblock file in my remote is corrupted according to verification (getting an HashMismatchException).
I ran the affected command and only one file is affected which is still at the source and hasn’t changed since 2020.
I deleted the corrupt dblock file on my remote.
Then a I ran a backup with --rebuild-missing-dblock-files=true.
It fails with the message like: dblock file missing, cant run backup, try repair. => I know its missing! Why don’t you rebuild it?!?
So I ran the repair command (also with --rebuild-missing-dblock-files=true as I’m not sure if this is even an option for backup command).
Also doesn’t work: Failed to perform cleanup for missing file: duplicati-…dblock.zip.aes, message: Repair not possible, missing 511 blocks.

As I’m in the exact situation what the rebuild-missing-dblock-files is intended for I’m not sure what I’m doing wrong here?!?

Thanks for your help in advance. Duplicati version is 2.1.0.5_stable_2025-03-04
Soko

Referring back to a GitHub SokoFromNZ comment, which I guess is you:

repair with rebuild-missing-dblock-files makes no log when it fails #5987

Does this fix my problem as well?

I don’t think there are ever any guarantees, but your chances increased.
Per the issue, the previous code was buggy and didn’t look in all places.
Even if all places are looked at, there’s no guarantee data is still around.

This increases the chances though, after the May 8, 2025 fix which is now in Canary test.

Current Canary works pretty well (avoid vacuum), but optional new UI is a bit less “done”.

One way to find out if repair can replace that dblock is to take the plunge and test Canary.
Canary may inadvertently introduce new bugs at any time though, so be careful if using it.

Have you been using Duplicati since before the file dated 2020? If not, why not purge and replace it with its current-version-content-same-as-the-historical-versions-so-nothing-lost?

One loss would be we’d not see if Canary fix actually comes through as it was intended to.

hi @ts678

Thanks, yeah…thats me.

Happy to hear its a bug and not that I use it wrong. I’ve purged already and the next backup uploaded the affected file again correctly.

So I’m sorted for the moment. Would be nice to know though if the current canary build fixes the issue… maxbe I find time to try it.

Thanks for your reply.
Soko

Below also came out, and almost certainly has the fix since it was months earlier. Experimental, while still a testing release, is less likely to surprise than is Canary.

1 Like