 |
 |
Back-Up Speed of Time Machine
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Zuerich Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hi, what are your experiences with the back-up speed of time machine?
I hooked on a UBS2 drive and time machine indicated 41 GByte to back-up. The process as indicated showed max 5 MByte/s, most of the time about 1 - 2 MByte/s.
So, finally I ran out to time and broke off after 1.5 GByte.
Does this have to do with USB2? I was expecting 20 MByte/s.
Kind regards,
Felix
|
|
2007 MacBook Pro 2.4 4 GByte RAM 320/7000 HD
2000 Powerbook Pismo G3 500 MHz, 640 MByte RAM, 40 GByte HD, Airport, NewerTech Battery, integrated DVD/CD-R(W) running Mac OS 10.4.11
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Felix 
Hi, what are your experiences with the back-up speed of time machine?
I hooked on a UBS2 drive and time machine indicated 41 GByte to back-up. The process as indicated showed max 5 MByte/s, most of the time about 1 - 2 MByte/s.
So, finally I ran out to time and broke off after 1.5 GByte.
Does this have to do with USB2? I was expecting 20 MByte/s.
Kind regards,
Felix
Yep.
|
|
Signature depreciated.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status:
Offline
|
|
Time Machine appears to transfer data slower than a regular file copy (maybe it's a "nice" process). The first backup takes a long time. Leave it running over night.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
USB2 is slow, slow, slow.
|
|
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Even with FireWire, it's less than speedy. Like Tetenal said, there must be something either "nice" about the process, or redundant on the copy.
|
Any ramblings are entirely my own, and do not represent those of my employers, coworkers, friends, or species
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Pacific Northwest
Status:
Offline
|
|
I got a FW800 enclosure with a SATA 3.0 drive inside for my TM drive. I'm glad I did with over 400 GB of data.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Pittsboro, NC
Status:
Offline
|
|
yes, a firewire 800 drive is the only way to go.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CT
Status:
Offline
|
|
Like others said, it appears to run slower then a normal file copy. I'm guessing as not to tax your system to hard while its working.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Beirut, Lebanon
Status:
Offline
|
|
Speaking of firewire, I just wanted to drop in a note about people complaining about the slow speed of network backups. Not much to be done about Airport networks, but for INITIAL backups in a simple network, I used IP over firewire and it was 10-12MBs transfers.
I have two computers-- a G5 iMac and a MBP. I initially tried to back up the MBP over the Airport network, with the 500GB LaCie plugged into the iMac via FW400. (Bah, time to upgrade the iMac.) That was dog slow and unusable. Then I tried to plug an an old 10/100 ethernet hub I had laying around. This worked, and was speedier, but still... Not good.
Simplest solution: Firewire cable between the two Macs, using IP over Firewire. Mounted the external drive on the MBP, set it as the TM disk and off we went. Quite zippy now. Not as good as I would like, but once the initial backup is done, wireless should be fine, no?
Apologies if this is the wrong thread.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
