[GuillaumeB]

So few days after i got my copy of leopard, Time Machine is already taking 50GB on my 120 GB LaCie portable hard drive... what's gonna happen next week when the whole thing is full of backups???
Will time machine rewrite or will I have to format the drive twice a month???

thanks

[Chuckit]

Time Machine will start tossing old backups when a disk fills up. But is the growth really linear?

[mduell]

How much data do you have on your MacBook Pro? 50GB doesn't seem like much.

Perhaps you should use the Time Machine options to exclude some folders (system, large temporary files, etc). Time Machine will begin deleting the oldest copies to make room for newer copies.

[Cadaver]

Make sure to exclude your Parallels (or similar) disk image if you use any Windows virtual machines. Each time you use it, Time Machine will backup the entire file, even if its multiple GB in size.

[talisker]

I've read that although Time Machine only backs up changes each time, this can take a lot of activity and space if you use large files, such as an Entourage database, which makes sense. However, my understanding was that the latest iPhoto uses a single large database, so does it have to back up the entire database every time you make a change, or is iPhoto handled in some clever other way?

[analogika]

iPhoto still uses exactly the same structure as before.

The iPhoto library folder simply has a new custom ending that will make it appear as a single file in the Finder.

[dillerX]

What I do is this.

I only really need my SItes folder backed up. As that is what I do for a living.

When I start the day, I start up Time Machine, and it can back up those hours I work and could possibly be changing that folder. Then I shut it off when I am done for the night.

Saves space, and backs up only when I am adding/deleting from there.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by analogika 

The iPhoto library folder simply has a new custom ending that will make it appear as a single file in the Finder.

Actually it doesn't. The name of the iPhoto Library is the same as it always has been. Including the ending – none.

[Wiskedjak]

It's backing up multiple versions of your HD over extended periods of time. It's gonna take up alot of space.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Actually it doesn't. The name of the iPhoto Library is the same as it always has been. Including the ending – none.

Right you are.

It's still a folder, though.

[Big Mac]

I just received my copy of Leopard but will not install it for awhile. I'm wondering if it's possible to set a maximum amount of space allocated to Time Machine.

[peeb]

It should be, but really it's best to use all the space for TM. It stores more copies of recent stuff, so you get hourly for the first day, but after that, it only stores one copy for the next day, after a week all but one is thrown away etc (I'm not sure those are 100% correct, but it's something like that).

[frdmfghtr]

Originally Posted by dillerX 

When I start the day, I start up Time Machine, and it can back up those hours I work and could possibly be changing that folder. Then I shut it off when I am done for the night.

Saves space, and backs up only when I am adding/deleting from there.

I don't think you need to turn TM on and off like this, because if nothing changes, nothing gets saved.

Here is what I have observed regarding the tossing/trimming of backups...

SHORT VERSION: The hourly incremental backups that have no change from hour to hour get tossed the following day; only the increments where there is a difference get saved.

LONG VERSION:
On a typical day, I'm on campus away from my TM drive. When I get home in the evening, TM makes its hourly backups through the night and into the next morning, where I disconnect and go about my day. Cycle repeats.

A few days ago, I worked from home for a few hours so the TM drive was connected while I was working and periodically saving my work. The hourly saves were now different, in contrast to the midnight-to-8-am saves where they were all the same.

When I looked back at that day's TM saves, it has one from early morning (about 1:30 am), one from about 9:30 am, and 10:30 am. The incremental hourlies from 2:30 am to 8:30 am were all dropped, since nothing changed.

In other words: the hourly incremental entries in the TM interface (which I think is VERY slick, btw) get dropped the following day if the delta from hour to hour is zero.

[Horsepoo!!!]

It's too bad Time Machine is such a hack implementation. With ZFS, it would make a hundred times more sense. Time Machine currently relies on the developer's good will to break large files up into small ones (which is not always possible and some people provide examples of this ... Parallels disk images or even large photo or video files.)

Because such technicalities are boring to a 'normal' person, it's highly likely they'll never really understand why their backup disk is getting filled up ridiculously quick but they'll just know that it does and Mac OS X will warn them incessantly that their disk is full and that Time Machine will proceed to overwrite older backups and they'll begin hating Time Machine and stop using it one or two days before Time Machine ZFS Edition is released at which point Time Machine will work correctly and not needlessly copy entire 5GB files every time a single byte changes within the file but the user won't give a **** because he doesn't understand the difference between Apple's current hack implementation and ZFS' elegant low-level implementation and simply continue hating Time Machine and never use it again.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I just received my copy of Leopard but will not install it for awhile. I'm wondering if it's possible to set a maximum amount of space allocated to Time Machine.

Sure, create a partition the size you want to dedicate to TM.

[peeb]

Or a disc image of the size you want for other things.

[swiz]

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!! 

It's too bad Time Machine is such a hack implementation. With ZFS, it would make a hundred times more sense. Time Machine currently relies on the developer's good will to break large files up into small ones (which is not always possible and some people provide examples of this ... Parallels disk images or even large photo or video files.)

Because such technicalities are boring to a 'normal' person, it's highly likely they'll never really understand why their backup disk is getting filled up ridiculously quick but they'll just know that it does and Mac OS X will warn them incessantly that their disk is full and that Time Machine will proceed to overwrite older backups and they'll begin hating Time Machine and stop using it one or two days before Time Machine ZFS Edition is released at which point Time Machine will work correctly and not needlessly copy entire 5GB files every time a single byte changes within the file but the user won't give a **** because he doesn't understand the difference between Apple's current hack implementation and ZFS' elegant low-level implementation and simply continue hating Time Machine and never use it again.

Finally someone who can give me a run for my money with run-on sentences.

[alex_kac]

Only problem with ZFS is that its not proven yet enough to be used for backup purposes. Maybe in a couple years.

[0157988944]

Trying my hand at punctuation...

Because such technicalities are boring to a 'normal' person, it's highly likely they'll never really understand why their backup disk is getting filled up ridiculously quickly. They'll just know that it does and Mac OS X will warn them incessantly that their disk is full and that Time Machine will proceed to overwrite older backups. They'll begin hating Time Machine and stop using it one or two days before Time Machine ZFS Edition is released, at which point Time Machine will work correctly and not needlessly copy entire 5GB files every time a single byte changes within the file. However, the user won't give a **** because he doesn't understand the difference between Apple's current hack implementation and ZFS' elegant low-level implementation; he will simply continue hating Time Machine and never use it again.

[peeb]

Well, Apple is moving to ZFS are they not? It looks like the current 'issues' with time machine will fall out when they move over, no?

[swiz]

Originally Posted by peeb 

Well, Apple is moving to ZFS are they not? It looks like the current 'issues' with time machine will fall out when they move over, no?

I could have swore I watched a movie demo online of TM before Leopard was out talking about how TM was so smart and it would use some kind of "events" file monitoring system so it only backed up changed stuff since the last backup. Is this how it works now or is this coming up?

[peeb]

Right now it backs up files that change. But if a huge file changes only one character, it still backs up the whole file - that's the complaint as I understand it.

[swiz]

Ok so this ZFS will be the thing that makes his happen?
Hopefully that update comes soon.

[peeb]

I don't think it's really that big a deal for people who don't use programs that have immense files.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by peeb 

I don't think it's really that big a deal for people who don't use programs that have immense files.

Yea, so few Mac users have iMovie/iDVD/Parallels/Entourage files sitting around.

[peeb]

Entourage and Parallels are the only ones to worry too much about there.

[Cadaver]

Originally Posted by peeb 

Entourage and Parallels are the only ones to worry too much about there.

And I believe Entourage 2008 uses individual files, not one big file, so this will be a non-issue when its released.

[peeb]

At last.