What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
61 Comments
- yomommanow, on 11/09/2007, -0/+19dugg for use of "1.7tb" and "tiny" in same sentence
- SpacedCowboy, on 11/09/2007, -2/+19Don't do it. Or at least, don't do it if you care that your "backup" is correct...
The reason Apple don't (yet) support the backup-over-the-network is that the backup cannot be secured. Basically, Time Machine uses the 'fullsync' mode of a local disk to check that the data has really (really!) been written to disk. It can then be sure that the restore will work. Network filesystems lie. They say "yes, I have the data" when the data is only in RAM, not synced to disk - and this'll take a firmware upgrade to fix.
I fully expect Apple to upgrade the firmware, and allow network-access to disks ASAP, but at the moment, you're just fooling yourself that you have a backup if you back up over the net. It could all easily go horribly wrong.
This has been a public service announcement. Heed it, or ignore at your data's peril. - sweintraub, on 11/09/2007, -0/+16built an automator action that does this for you. Too easy!
http://9to5mac.com/time-machine-fix-flux-capacitor ... - Mindflux, on 11/11/2007, -1/+15Snap. Gotta love that my post on MR made it here.
- msergeant, on 11/09/2007, -0/+12So what are you so afraid of?
- BuddhistPirate, on 11/09/2007, -1/+12I like the fact that the pref is named "UnsupportedNetworkVolumes".
And my 1.7tb array is now a tiny bit more useful. - dantidote, on 11/09/2007, -0/+11I think I love you.
- IphtashuFitz, on 11/10/2007, -4/+14And if you blindly use a feature with the name "Unsupported" as your sole means of backup and expect it to save you when the drive in your Mac fails then you deserve exactly what you get. I wouldn't trust ANY unsupported feature in ANY backup software to protect my data. For all we know this feature is called UnsupportedNetworkVolumes because Apple knows of bugs in TimeMachine that can cause data corruption when backing up to those devices.
- streak, on 11/09/2007, -0/+7Caveat emptor, if using an AirDisk.
- ungamedplayer, on 11/09/2007, -0/+7I'm afraid that I'm not sure of a love there is no cure for.
- r0b1, on 11/09/2007, -0/+6Safety not guaranteed. I've only done this once before.
- Mindflux, on 11/09/2007, -0/+4I've been using it over airdisk since I posted that on MR. The initial 60GB backup was hairy, but once that got done the very small incrementals go off without a hitch.
- cpalmer74, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3I'm doing a backup to it right now, it creates a sparseimage on the target drive, mounts it to the desktop and starts copying.
Activity monitor says I'm moving about 800k sec over 5ghz N to a Lacie 500gb drive. Inside the image is the Backups.backupdb file that i usually see as a normal folder directly on the drive. Backups.backupdb/Machinename/2007-08-200001.inProgress file is being built.
Now i need to figure out how to recover in a disaster scenario. - Darph.Bobo, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3Isn't that what life is made of?
- mllawso, on 11/09/2007, -1/+4That's what she said.
- lilmoonee, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3This shouldn't be a problem because it creates a disk image on the server's storage. This disk image has its own file system which is formatted as HFS+ and will do the hard links. The only worry that might come up is when doing a full system backup and trying to get the installer disc to recognize the network backup.
- maino82, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3i'm going to choose to read "old papers and stuff" as "vintage porn"
- lolwtfhaha, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3Actually, NFS, for instance, does not "lie" unless you specifically want it to lie to you. It is not much different from a local disk, especially if you use the "hard" mount option (processes will wait forever for the disk to come back, if the network goes down, and then resume perfectly).
- inactive, on 11/10/2007, -1/+4Was it really that much work for Apple to test Time Machine properly before they released it? TM is basically the only "real" addition to OS X - why has it been such a *****?
- knightboat, on 11/10/2007, -1/+3They don't, as evidenced by the 5th post with a link to an Automator action.
If you're going to troll or try to be cute, at least be funny or original. - liuping, on 11/09/2007, -0/+2It work ofver AFP with my ReadyNas, just not reliably with Airdisk.
- agilligan, on 11/09/2007, -0/+2I've been using this for the last week to backup to an AFP share... (FreeBSD + netatalk)
It works just fine. - bannonto, on 11/09/2007, -0/+2This is so easy- Thanks for making me love my mac again.
- bannonto, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2For right now it a great option. If it doesn't copy all of my info correctly, that is better than no data at all.
- phill, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1I back up my important things to my NAS, then from there to DVD/CD. I backup my most important data to DVD/CD. Now I have Time Machine backing up to my NAS, and I still back up my important things to DVD.
- Mindflux, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1Yes.
- Me1000, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2it would only require a time machine update (not firmware) to backup to NAS drives.
- smartssa, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2thanks for the tip!
- kazersoza, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1Now the true test ... try a restore. Single file, directory,..etc. If you do please post the results.
- dhmlco, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1Folks, this is not recommended, and especially not if the "unsupported" drive is an AirDisk. You stand a very good chance of losing and/or corrupting your data.
See: http://www.iSights.org/2007/11/more-airport-ex.htm ... - joped, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1I have been running this for a few days, and I have found that getting corrupted images on the target NAS is very common. I believe that is why Apple pulled the plug on it before release. Its not stable. I just hope they fix it.
- yabos, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1It works just fine from within the Finder. The only problem I can think of is that you probably can't restore when booted from the install DVD because it won't be aware of your network disks.
- naevity, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1you can do a restore from a backup using the install DVD
- JzzL, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1I have it going on my AFP (netatalk) server running ubuntu. So far so good. Like stated, dont use this for your primary backup!
- HappyScrappy, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1What, me worry?
- pkulak, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1Yeah, but how is it worse then not backing up, unless your suggesting that it could corrupt the source data, which seems like a bit of a long shot.
- pyrates, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1and how are u supposed to restore the data if your main hard drive crashes? Doesn't time machine need it connected to your computer in order to do a full restore?
- Embro, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1So what's the difference using this and using the shared TM backup on Leopard Server? It works over AFP.
- yabos, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1Yeah, that's funny seeing how I've been running it over AFP for over a week with this command. So far so good.
- cpalmer74, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1late last night the first backup over airport failed. "An error occurred while trying to create the backup directory"
oh well - thaimyshoe, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1Tried this out backing up to a networked desktop running Windows XP. It finds the shared folder on the desktop and connects as a disk image. On the Windows computer, it creates a folder like a regular TM backup, but the files inside are unreadable. However, OS X will detect it and the files are readable from there. Connect and restores just fine so far.
I have a Macbook Pro that I take between home and work. I have TM backing up my whole computer there to an external HD, and just my work/client files at home to my desktop, so this works as a good fail-safe in case either backup goes up in flames. - yabos, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1You may be right but I've been using it for about a week and it's working just fine. I'm using an AFP share from an OS X Tiger Server machine. Maybe it'd be better to mount it as NFS and I might switch it over to that some time. Your problem would only really pertain to the most recent backup. Also, since there's usually hundreds of hard links created by TM, the likelihood of them all being in the disk cache for a long time is fairly low.
- TheColonel, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2What makes you think they DIDN'T test it? This is labeled as Unsupported, not unfinished, or untested, they tested it and obviously had a reason to disable the feature. Most likely, as already mentioned in this thread, due to the ability to know for sure something has been committed. If you want an unreliable or not 100% guaranteed backup, then use this method and have one. If you don't, use a real disc!
- ExSlashdotter, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1Do i have to bring my own weapons too?
- hackerssidekick, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1It's worse because people would then (incorrectly) assume that stuff is being backed up when it isn't, and thus won't be as careful with their data. Stupid, I know, but it's the truth
- srosebush, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1It works! Now my WD MyBook World Edition 1TB NAS which I installed afpd on is useful again.
- agentile27, on 11/09/2007, -0/+0Does it work with a drive hooked up to an AirPort (AirDisk)?
- retrofitme, on 11/09/2007, -0/+0Has anyone tried restoring from one of these 'unsupported' backups?
- Stonekeeper, on 11/10/2007, -1/+1I'm not too bothered about being funny, but I am pretty cute :D
- vacuum2440, on 11/10/2007, -1/+1*****!
-
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is