+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... (/showthread.php?tid=150249)
Pages:
1
2
Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - PeterB - 03-22-2013
... TM will back up to it, but gives occasional errors; and when I try to repair the disk with Disk Utility, it's stopping the repair saying that it can't repair and to back up the disk. DiskWarrior won't repair it either, because it gives an out-of-memory error on it, which I assume is due to the vast number of files and folders. (I haven't tried booting from the DiskWarrior CD to do the repair though.)
Should I just erase the disk? It kinda sucks to lose all the history of backups...
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - Chakravartin - 03-22-2013
As a general rule, do not even try to repair directory damage on a Time Machine volume.
The problem is the huge number of hard links. It takes ages to resolve them and it can confuse the heck out of lesser utilities. (DW usually can fix 'em, but it can take days to do it.)
So, when a Time Machine backup goes bad, save yourself the headache and just erase the backup drive and start fresh.
(And be grateful that you also backup nightly to a bootable external drive with Carbon Copy Cloner... You do that, right?)
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - PeterB - 03-22-2013
Chak, this particular time machine backup is for my work machine, a MBP. So no, I don't have a nightly backup for this machine... the TM backup is actually more useful, because it's mostly about recovering old versions of things-- if I had to recover the whole machine, I'd probably just nuke and pave.
I'm tempted to let DW go the several days, as you suggest...
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - silvarios - 03-22-2013
PeterB wrote:
Chak, this particular time machine backup is for my work machine, a MBP. So no, I don't have a nightly backup for this machine... the TM backup is actually more useful, because it's mostly about recovering old versions of things-- if I had to recover the whole machine, I'd probably just nuke and pave.
I'm tempted to let DW go the several days, as you suggest...
Good points, but to be fair. CCC can archive changed/deleted data as well. Which is why I use Carbon Copy Cloner and not Time Machine. Well, that and I need easy access to a network backup.
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - deckeda - 03-22-2013
PeterB wrote:
... the TM backup is actually more useful ...
I think you misunderstand --- he wasn't suggesting the CCC bootable backup in place of the TM backup since each type of backup has different capability.
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - silvarios - 03-22-2013
deckeda wrote:
[quote=PeterB]
... the TM backup is actually more useful ...
I think you misunderstand --- he wasn't suggesting the CCC bootable backup in place of the TM backup since each type of backup has different capability.
While the suggestion would not seem to be one backup in place of another, I would like to point out even if that were the suggestion, to replace Time Machine with CCC, Peter wouldn't loose functionality with the switch. CCC can archive changed/deleted files.
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - sekker - 03-22-2013
Frankly, when any backup drive is that messed up, I swap out the hardware (so that I have a quality backup working), then do some work on the drive. External 3.5" powered drives are very cheap (and inexpensive, too).
1) You might have a hardware issue on that drive. If you CAN use it as a TM archive, I'd go ahead and run the DW check after you have another drive connected and working as your backup drive (TM or CCC, whichever you like).
2) You could then just put that TM drive on the shelf to use as an archive when you absolutely need to grab some deleted or older file. In my experience, 99% of such access is within the first 6 months. After that, it's pretty rare you need anything older.
I've gone to the TM and CCC parallel model for my backups/archives. When I'm working on a project, I like the mindless and automatic features of TM. I then have a daily CCC backup that's bootable. We've had two more hard drives fail in the last month, both under warranty. The issue is just the commoditization of that market.
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - deckeda - 03-22-2013
silvarios wrote:
[quote=deckeda]
[quote=PeterB]
... the TM backup is actually more useful ...
I think you misunderstand --- he wasn't suggesting the CCC bootable backup in place of the TM backup since each type of backup has different capability.
While the suggestion would not seem to be one backup in place of another, I would like to point out even if that were the suggestion, to replace Time Machine with CCC, Peter wouldn't loose functionality with the switch. CCC can archive changed/deleted files.
Peter would lose efficient versioning capability (which he may or may not care about.) CCC doesn't keep the old iteration of a file unless as a whole copy, with attendant file storage requirements not needed by TM's use of hard links.
My hard disks typically die before they fill up from TM; that would't happen [for me] under CCC so from my experience there's a bit of a long-term cost advantage with TM, although of course I wouldn't be without CCC either, for what it can do.
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - silvarios - 03-23-2013
deckeda wrote:
Peter would lose efficient versioning capability (which he may or may not care about.) CCC doesn't keep the old iteration of a file unless as a whole copy, with attendant file storage requirements not needed by TM's use of hard links.
Time Machine also keeps whole versions of a file for archive purposes.
For example, if you are backing up 30 files and only one changes, CCC keeps 29 files the same, backs up one new version, and then archives one file (assuming you configure CCC to behave in such a manner). Similarly, if you are backing up 30 files with Time Machine and one changes, 29 files stay the same, one new file gets copied over, and then one file is archived.
Am I misunderstanding? Been a while since I used Time Machine for anything other than the simplest users. Are you saying Time Machine only backs up the changes? As in I edit one character in a Text Edit file and Time Machine only saves a single character?
Re: Gahhh! Time Machine backup disk problems... - silvarios - 03-23-2013
Double checked the Time Machine docs and contrasted with Carbon Copy Cloner's docs, deckeda, you should give CCC another whirl. CCC does not require every file to be recopied on each backup, even with a whole drive clone. Carbon Copy Cloner has supported incremental backups for years and has archived changed/deleted files for the last few years as well. Assuming you've set CCC up to behave this way, as there are many options for fine tuning your individual backup needs.