Prev: arbeit im ausland de praktikum im ausland Krankenpfleger Schmied Schmiedin
Next: Stickies question
From: The NewGuy on 24 Jun 2008 11:53
Using 10.4.11 with Silverkeeper 1.1.4 and am finding that Silverkeeper
takes forever (like several hours) to backup about 12 gb of stuff. I
was wondering if I didn't make the backup bootable, would that save a
lot of time? Does making the backup bootable make it more challenging
for the backup task to check everything? I'd like to make it bootable
but its not vitally important. When I copy and paste between hard
drives things seem to move so effortlessly.
From: Mike Rosenberg on 24 Jun 2008 17:21
The NewGuy <noemailhere(a)please.comm> wrote:

> Using 10.4.11 with Silverkeeper 1.1.4 and am finding that Silverkeeper
> takes forever (like several hours) to backup about 12 gb of stuff.

Something is _very_ wrong if it's taking that long. Is this still
involving that defective drive? And, if so, is there some point at which
you're planning to accept that it's defective and move on?

> I was wondering if I didn't make the backup bootable, would that save a
> lot of time? Does making the backup bootable make it more challenging for
> the backup task to check everything? I'd like to make it bootable but its
> not vitally important.

Whether the backup is bootable should have no significant effect on the
time it takes. As I've already said, something is _very_ wrong. Twelve
gigs should take well under an hour.

--
I kill Google Groups posts. See http://improve-usenet.org for details.
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/greet.cgi> Holiday cards with attitude
From: Erik Richard Sørensen on 24 Jun 2008 17:43

The NewGuy wrote:
> Using 10.4.11 with Silverkeeper 1.1.4 and am finding that Silverkeeper
> takes forever (like several hours) to backup about 12 gb of stuff. I
> was wondering if I didn't make the backup bootable, would that save a
> lot of time? Does making the backup bootable make it more challenging
> for the backup task to check everything? I'd like to make it bootable
> but its not vitally important. When I copy and paste between hard
> drives things seem to move so effortlessly.

Yes, Silverkeeper can really be a 'troublemaker'... It can take forever
to make a backup, and sometimes you can't even be sure that things have
been backed up or not, and you can't even be sure that the 'bootable
backup' is bootable on any system higher than OS X 10.3.9.

I've been using SK from time to time since first release - mostly for
testing, - but never trusted it.

For normal backups i've now changed to use the LaCie OneClick Backup,
but it can't make bootable backups. It is fast and reliable. Takes
apprx. 90 mins. to backup around 100gb of data. Like SK it's free.
http://www.lacie.com/us/support/support_manifest.htm?id=10092

Recently I've changed to use a new backup and clone program called
'Backuplist+ 6.0' - made by Robert DuToit. Backuplist+ is built on the
incorporated rSync engine in OS X and can make normal backups, folder
backups, sync of both folders, files and disks, make bootable clones,
sync and update a bootable clone, make incremental backups and more. -
I've tried it now on both a CPU upgraded Quicksilver with OS X 10.4.11
and 10.5.3 and a MacPro also with both 10.4.11 and 10.5.3. Backuplist+
requires at least 10.3.x to work. Until now I've had no problems. - All
clones are fully bootable here...
http://rdutoit.home.comcast.net/~rdutoit/pub/Softw.html

cheers, Erik Richard

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rgds. Grüße, Mvh. Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC
<mac-man_NOSP(a)M_stofanet.dk> <http://www.nisus.com>
NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Textprocessing
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: Mike Rosenberg on 24 Jun 2008 17:53
Erik Richard S�rensen <NOSPAM(a)NOSPAM.dk> wrote:

> Yes, Silverkeeper can really be a 'troublemaker'... It can take forever
> to make a backup, and sometimes you can't even be sure that things have
> been backed up or not, and you can't even be sure that the 'bootable
> backup' is bootable on any system higher than OS X 10.3.9.

We established a long time ago that, outside Denmark, SilverKeeper 1.1.4
is quite reliable. That's changed with Leopard, but for Tiger it remains
as solid, at least here in the US, as ever.

--
I kill Google Groups posts. See http://improve-usenet.org for details.
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/greet.cgi> Holiday cards with attitude
From: Erik Richard Sørensen on 24 Jun 2008 18:02


Mike Rosenberg wrote:
> Erik Richard Sørensen <NOSPAM(a)NOSPAM.dk> wrote:
>
>> Yes, Silverkeeper can really be a 'troublemaker'... It can take forever
>> to make a backup, and sometimes you can't even be sure that things have
>> been backed up or not, and you can't even be sure that the 'bootable
>> backup' is bootable on any system higher than OS X 10.3.9.
>
> We established a long time ago that, outside Denmark, SilverKeeper 1.1.4
> is quite reliable. That's changed with Leopard, but for Tiger it remains
> as solid, at least here in the US, as ever.

_You_ 'established' that. - I know quite a lot of people in the US, and
none of them do trust in Silverkeeper with _any_ OS X system!

cheers, Erik Richard

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rgds. Grüße, Mvh. Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC
<mac-man_NOSP(a)M_stofanet.dk> <http://www.nisus.com>
NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Textprocessing
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: arbeit im ausland de praktikum im ausland Krankenpfleger Schmied Schmiedin
Next: Stickies question