Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- From: Jolly Roger <jollyroger@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 04:25:47 -0500
In article <6f2msmF9hsmtU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Chris Ridd <chrisridd@xxxxxxx> wrote:
gmark wrote:
Wow, now that you mention it, if that's true, then no backup snapshot
would be
a true "snapshot", but rather a collection of files with a close range
of timestamps
I can't see how you could do anything else, TBH.
I believe Retrospect handles this by first calculating checksums for all
files in the backup. Retrospect makes note of any files that have
changed in the error log during the actual backup.
distributed over the time it took to make that backup. So a faster
interface would
result in a smaller range of file sample times.
Right, but it will still always be a "blur" of what's on your filesystem
unless you've got an infinitely fast interface :-)
There's really no easy way to get around this.
--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than to me, as
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.
JR
.
- References:
- Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- From: gmark
- Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- From: Malcolm
- Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- From: TaliesinSoft
- Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- From: Chris Ridd
- Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- From: gmark
- Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- From: Chris Ridd
- Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- Prev by Date: Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- Next by Date: Re: Usenet Newsreader for iPod touch
- Previous by thread: Re: Time Machine - Effects of Disk Interface Speed?
- Next by thread: Usenet Newsreader for iPod touch
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|