Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Warning: unsupported Time Machine volumes for backups can be dangerous' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Warning: unsupported Time Machine volumes for backups can be dangerous
Authored by: dbs on Nov 10, '09 09:57:16AM

I'll repeat my warning from previous hints in this regard: if you care about the integrity of your backup don't use unsupported volumes.

For time machine to work reliably across network dropouts and computer wake/sleep events in the middle of a backup, it relies on the journaling system of HFS+. However, for this to work on a disk image, the file server must support completely flushing writes to disk on command. (Otherwise the contract of a disk journal is broken and the file system can be corrupted.) The file servers that do not show up automatically in Time Machine are the ones that do not support this feature, so by tricking Time Machine to work with them, you are putting your backup at risk.

Basically, if you care about your backup not getting corrupted, don't use a network volume that doesn't show up automatically.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Warning: unsupported Time Machine volumes for backups can be dangerous
Authored by: Anonymous on Nov 10, '09 12:15:08PM

Hey, it took this long and this much effort for people to start doing backups. You think they care about restores?



[ Reply to This | # ]
Warning: unsupported Time Machine volumes for backups can be dangerous
Authored by: everkleer80 on Nov 10, '09 01:17:54PM

Haha you're probably right for the most part! Now that I have the feature, I use it, but my data's not all THAT important so if the backup helps me out then great, if it gets corrupted or something then it's not a huge deal. And I'd be willing to bet that most people think like that (and If their backups are critical then I'm sure they're not using Time Machine!)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Critical Backups and TM
Authored by: rodneyweston on Nov 10, '09 02:19:49PM

Suggestion: If their backups are critical they are not JUST using Time Machine. I find TM very effective for what it does (especially restoring old versions of files which I have stupidly written over - such as last months bank reconciliation).

However, for my system backups, I have two SuperDuper! clones... which is faster and (reportedly) more reliable for a full system restore using TM.



[ Reply to This | # ]