Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yeah I was getting the bug with Arq 6 as well. For now I just disabled it as it is one of my 3 backup methods. I'll wait for Arq 7. I do miss the feature rich Arq 5 ... but Arq 6 has worked really well for me and I've used it for a long time on windows and Mac so I've grown used to it. It works.
I got the updated Arq 6 version the earlier post mentioned, but it never could finish the scan process after I reinstated the APFS setting that had caused the problem earlier. Finally had to just get rid of the backup plan altogether so the Mac would stop hanging on launch/reboot. So, now, have requested the Arq 7 pre-release version. Like @BigMcGuire, gonna depend on my other backup methods for the time being. Argh.
Last edited:
I got this from Arq support. I updated to 6.2.66 and reenabled the snapshot setting and it seems fixed.
====
We fixed that error in version 6.2.66. Please click "Settings" and check your version number.
If it's not 6.2.66, please install the latest (you won't lose any settings).
You would need to quit Arq and install 6.2.66 from this link: https://www.arqbackup.com/download/arqbackup/Arq6.2.66.pkg
====
We fixed that error in version 6.2.66. Please click "Settings" and check your version number.
If it's not 6.2.66, please install the latest (you won't lose any settings).
You would need to quit Arq and install 6.2.66 from this link: https://www.arqbackup.com/download/arqbackup/Arq6.2.66.pkg
6.2.66 is the version I have; it had auto-upgraded to it, as Stefan had indicated it would. But when I re-enabled that APFS setting causing the issue in the earlier version, the process was still hung up at the 99% completion point ten hours later. Trying to stop it would cause Spinning Beachball City, and I couldn't stop processes even with Activity Monitor. Only solution that would "un-hang" everything was to turn off the backup plan altogether. Perhaps I panicked, but — with the workday upcoming today — I didn't want to leave stuff hung up all night just in case it was going to cause the Mac to go weird on me while I was working in a VM.
. . . and, while I was posting this, I just received the requested link to get the pre-release version of Arq 7. So, guess I'll wait till after work and give it a shot, unless you folks can give me a better idea to resolve this nastiness without going there.
. . . and, while I was posting this, I just received the requested link to get the pre-release version of Arq 7. So, guess I'll wait till after work and give it a shot, unless you folks can give me a better idea to resolve this nastiness without going there.
Updating . . .
I had good success with Arq 7.0.0.46. Process took 15 hours since it had to do a do-over because I'd changed the plan settings; but all went well. This UI is very much an improvement on Arq 6 and, for those of you not willing to go with a pre-release version just yet, will be well worth the wait. Hang in there.
I had good success with Arq 7.0.0.46. Process took 15 hours since it had to do a do-over because I'd changed the plan settings; but all went well. This UI is very much an improvement on Arq 6 and, for those of you not willing to go with a pre-release version just yet, will be well worth the wait. Hang in there.
Does version 7 use version 6 buckets for both read and write, or do we need to start fresh?Updating . . .
I had good success with Arq 7.0.0.46. Process took 15 hours since it had to do a do-over because I'd changed the plan settings; but all went well. This UI is very much an improvement on Arq 6 and, for those of you not willing to go with a pre-release version just yet, will be well worth the wait. Hang in there.
Uses existing buckets. But if you had to adjust your plan due to the earlier-mentioned APFS bug, you'll have to do a fresh (not incremental) backup, as I mentioned above.
Thank you. That’s good to know. I’ve had APFS snapshots turned off from the beginning so I’m good.
Arq 7 released today.
www.arqbackup.com
Arq 7: Lots More Power - Arq Backup Blog
Arq 7 is here with more power to give you more control over your backups than ever before! Arq 7 is fully backward-compatible with backup data created by older versions of Arq, but it’s packed with new features. It’s been through 4+ months of internal and beta testing, so it’s solid. And it’s...
www.arqbackup.com
Arq is going to a subscription model. The app is $49.99 to purchase and that gets you updates for one year. It looks like the app will keep working when the year is up, but if you want continued updates, it is $25.00 a year.
How interesting. Yet another subscription to ponder whether or not I actually want to pay. That said, $25/year is .... that's ... that's not terrible especially for something I pay for everyday.
This year I got rid of my $120/year BackBlaze Unlimited because ... I wasn't using more than 30GB. lol. So I use Arq with B2 and I'm paying like ... 4 cents a month? lol. So $25/year isn't terrible.
One thing for sure. All these subscriptions? I've REALLY reduced my app usage and my want to try new apps has gone down significantly.
Without throwing this off topic ---- I think I'll sign up for it. I use Arq at work on company servers (paid company license) and at home. Vs the $120 I was paying ... ok. Sure.
Yeah.. I don't think $25 a year is too bad. Here are my notes from previous paid upgrades and the dates.
==========
8/14/14
Arq Backup 4
4/12/16
Arq 5
4/7/2020
Arq 6
==========
8/14/14
Arq Backup 4
4/12/16
Arq 5
4/7/2020
Arq 6
I have no issues with software the requires yearly fees for updates, yet allow continued usage of a frozen version if one chooses to stop paying for updates. My issue is with apps that require reoccurring payments for usage or they stop working. Arq’s approach is reasonable.
Arq 7 accepted my Arq 4 lifetime license code.
Just installed it on my MacBook. Wow. I much prefer this interface to Arq 6. While Arq 6 worked, I was not a fan of the UI.
It recognized my Arq 6 license and boom, I'm good with 7 for awhile. A+ program / company. First time doing an Arq 7 backup it looks like it does some "Creating pointers to Arq 6 backup data (one-time operation)" - so just be prepared - might take awhile. Now it's initializing database from previous backup. Woot! I'm happy.
It recognized my Arq 6 license and boom, I'm good with 7 for awhile. A+ program / company. First time doing an Arq 7 backup it looks like it does some "Creating pointers to Arq 6 backup data (one-time operation)" - so just be prepared - might take awhile. Now it's initializing database from previous backup. Woot! I'm happy.
I installed it as well and it was smooth and quick. A job well done by the developer.
I'm loving the native interface, and most important to me, the return of full file upload logging. I highly recommend Arq to anyone that is considering it.
Hi everyone, I need some advice regarding setting up a local network backup. So far I've been using a raspberry pi 4 as a local storage location (SMB) to back up my MacBook (+external volumes) using time machine. It seemed to have worked well so far. Anyhow, I recently got a new MacBook and I wanted to start over with the backups. So I was pondering to whether to use time machine again or use Are 7 to back up the network backup for the internal hard drive + external hard drives. In addition, I also have a Arq Backup setup with one drive for important personal files and an external hd for Time machine, so the local network backup will be another back up source for all my data.
I was wondering about the pros and cons of both, using Time Machine or Arq. Any advice regarding this?
I was wondering about the pros and cons of both, using Time Machine or Arq. Any advice regarding this?
Frankly, it is a bit difficult to follow your post, but what I understand is the following:
A few comments from my side, based on this understanding:
You have the basics of a 3-2-1 backup strategy here. The 3-2-1 strategy states that you should have 3 copies of each file (at least the ones you care about), on 2 different media, with 1 offsite. These are minimums for best practice; having more than this is even better. So in your case, you have backups on the SMB share, possibly an external HD using TimeMachine????, and offsite on OneDrive. Counting the main copies of your files on your MacBook and its external HD, that gives 3 (or 4) copies, 3 different media, one offsite.
That said, there are some who question the reliability of TimeMachine backups. See, for example
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/how-reliable-is-time-machine.1960270/
TM backups rely on sparsebundles (which comprise many small files), and so I believe there are some reliability concerns, especially when backing up over a network. Using a RPi4-based NAS would only add to my concerns about robustness/ reliability.
You asked for advice, so I can share what I do. I use TimeMachine backing up to a NAS for convenience, but my primary backup strategy involves backing up my clients with Arq to a local NAS as well as to the cloud (Backblaze B2). On my main iMac, I also image my system disk to an external using Carbon Copy Cloner, so this gives me a "hot spare" system ready to go if my main internal HD fails.
Good luck!
- You back up using TimeMachine via SMB to a RPi-based network share, locally (within your home).
- You also back up (at least your "important" files) to the cloud (OneDrive) using Arq.
- You also back up to an external HD using TimeMachine???? I really don't follow what you mean by
A few comments from my side, based on this understanding:
You have the basics of a 3-2-1 backup strategy here. The 3-2-1 strategy states that you should have 3 copies of each file (at least the ones you care about), on 2 different media, with 1 offsite. These are minimums for best practice; having more than this is even better. So in your case, you have backups on the SMB share, possibly an external HD using TimeMachine????, and offsite on OneDrive. Counting the main copies of your files on your MacBook and its external HD, that gives 3 (or 4) copies, 3 different media, one offsite.
That said, there are some who question the reliability of TimeMachine backups. See, for example
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/how-reliable-is-time-machine.1960270/
TM backups rely on sparsebundles (which comprise many small files), and so I believe there are some reliability concerns, especially when backing up over a network. Using a RPi4-based NAS would only add to my concerns about robustness/ reliability.
You asked for advice, so I can share what I do. I use TimeMachine backing up to a NAS for convenience, but my primary backup strategy involves backing up my clients with Arq to a local NAS as well as to the cloud (Backblaze B2). On my main iMac, I also image my system disk to an external using Carbon Copy Cloner, so this gives me a "hot spare" system ready to go if my main internal HD fails.
Good luck!
I have never been able to get Time Machine to work well on the network. May have just been me but ... I've always had a drive specifically attached to my Mac for TM to work well.
I use Arq with B2 for off site backup - I figure TM fulfilled the local backup role well enough without needing another local backup - especially since all of my data is in the cloud anyway (iCloud/OneDrive). So this works for me. TM local, Arq B2 off site, and everything in iCloud (personal) and OneDrive (work). I used to use CCC but due to the complexities of encrypted local backups, I just use it to sync folders when I need them, etc.
So I may not be the best person to give advice about this
.@VideoFreek and @BigMcGuire. Thank you so much for your replies. It helps me a lot.
Yeah, I don't think I was very clear in my long winded explanation
So with my old MacBook I had a set up like this
1. TM backup every hour to a network share (raspberry pi) for all my files including the data on external hard drives
2. TM backup every night to an external hard drive
3. Arq backup every hour to onedrive for all my important files
So I got a new MacBook and I thought I should maybe start over with my network backups as I did a clean setup. The desire to replace TM as the method to back to the network share was partly driven by what I read about it's unreliability backing up to sparsebundles.
So basically what I am trialling right now is
1. Arq backup every hour to raspberry pi for all my files (I am actually also testing, Duplicacy, to see if it fits my needs better).
2. TM backup every night to an external hard drive
3. Arq backup every hour to onedrive for all my important files
I am also thinking about having another offsite backup. I am looking into something like B2 or Wasabi. The main concern here is the cost. We will see.
As for my current testing, I have been pretty impressed with Duplicacy. It is definitely much faster than Arq for backups. Arq takes around 10 mins to scan all my data on my internal drive plus more if I have my external drives attached as well. In comparison Duplicacy only takes like 2 mins for the backup.
Do you guys have any experience with Duplicacy?
Thanks again for your advice.
Yeah, I don't think I was very clear in my long winded explanation
So with my old MacBook I had a set up like this
1. TM backup every hour to a network share (raspberry pi) for all my files including the data on external hard drives
2. TM backup every night to an external hard drive
3. Arq backup every hour to onedrive for all my important files
So I got a new MacBook and I thought I should maybe start over with my network backups as I did a clean setup. The desire to replace TM as the method to back to the network share was partly driven by what I read about it's unreliability backing up to sparsebundles.
So basically what I am trialling right now is
1. Arq backup every hour to raspberry pi for all my files (I am actually also testing, Duplicacy, to see if it fits my needs better).
2. TM backup every night to an external hard drive
3. Arq backup every hour to onedrive for all my important files
I am also thinking about having another offsite backup. I am looking into something like B2 or Wasabi. The main concern here is the cost. We will see.
As for my current testing, I have been pretty impressed with Duplicacy. It is definitely much faster than Arq for backups. Arq takes around 10 mins to scan all my data on my internal drive plus more if I have my external drives attached as well. In comparison Duplicacy only takes like 2 mins for the backup.
Do you guys have any experience with Duplicacy?
Thanks again for your advice.
Sorry, I don't. I wasn't even aware of Duplicacy, but I took at quick look at their website, and it looks pretty slick. I like the deduplication feature, and besides this it appears to have many of the same features of Arq. Like Arq, they provide source code so that if they ever go out of business, you don't lose access to your backups. Very important!
I'll probably evaluate it myself, just for fun. Thanks for the tip.
I have been running Duplicacy (with the paid http interface) for nearly a year alongside Arq 5 and now Arq 7. My views (for cloud backup):
Plus for Arq 7:
Arq backup is significantly faster than Duplicacy.
Arq interface is more intuitive and easy to use - it is much more polished from a Mac user perspective.
Arq can run as administrator (no file permissions issues).
Duplicacy's underlying command line interface is far too complex for the average user.
Duplicacy is painful for restores - just getting to the list of files/folders available is cumbersome and tedious.
Arq support is responsive and for a while has been more than just Stefan.
Duplicacy support is only via a user forum.
Duplicacy user forum requires some understanding of the complexities of the command line app - not for the beginner.
Arq stated aim is development by continuous improvement - it used to be major upgrade every 2 or 3 years.
Duplicacy seems pretty static (but this may be unfair).
Plus for Duplicacy:
De-duplication across all computers, Arq is only per backup set.
Duplicacy runs as user (more secure if there are bugs).
The underlying command-line app is open source.
Arq 7 storage format is not fully documented or open source.
Duplicacy support is via a user forum.
Duplicacy just works, Arq is only just coming out of a bad year with Arq 6.
For both:
Reliable, though I have never yet needed to do a full restore.
I am undecided whether to continue with Duplicacy when my first year of http interface expires (it is not expensive). I will certainly continue with Arq 7.
We all have to do what is best suited to our circumstances and perceived needs. But I would suggest (in order of importance):
1. Hourly (default automation) of Time Machine to external drive.
2. Arq backup daily to OneDrive. Since this is for major disaster (fire/theft), daily is all that is needed.
My view is that Arq (and Duplicacy) are best suited for cloud backup, though they work fine as an additional local backup.
I am not in favour of a Pi for backup - better is either directly attached disk(s) or NAS with proper TM support (e.g. Synology).
Last edited:
For those who subscribe to this particular thread who haven’t yet seen the flack about what Backblaze got caught doing...
Ben Cox on Twitter: "WTF? @backblaze 's B2 web UI seems to submit all of the names and sizes of my files in my B2 bucket to facebook. I noticed because I saw "waiting for facebook .com" at the bottom while trying to download a backup... ?!?!?!? I even opted out of their tracking widget thing! https://t.co/IkqkGNTkSi" / Twitter
Backblaze says it has pushed a fix, but this HN thread gives you an idea of the understandably unhappy reaction from Backblaze customers:
Backblaze submitting names and sizes of files in B2 buckets to Facebook | Hacker News (ycombinator.com)
While one commenter there says correctly that using B2 from Arq should be safe (especially if you’re using encryption), some of you may want to consider what this issue says about Backblaze. I’ve been a happy B2-via-Arq user since August, 2017, but am now re-evaluating the B2 part. Wasabi would be the apparent logical second choice on a price/performance-comparison basis, but I certainly am open to hearing about some of the other choices available via Arq (Storage Locations (arqbackup.com).
FYI.
Ben Cox on Twitter: "WTF? @backblaze 's B2 web UI seems to submit all of the names and sizes of my files in my B2 bucket to facebook. I noticed because I saw "waiting for facebook .com" at the bottom while trying to download a backup... ?!?!?!? I even opted out of their tracking widget thing! https://t.co/IkqkGNTkSi" / Twitter
Backblaze says it has pushed a fix, but this HN thread gives you an idea of the understandably unhappy reaction from Backblaze customers:
Backblaze submitting names and sizes of files in B2 buckets to Facebook | Hacker News (ycombinator.com)
While one commenter there says correctly that using B2 from Arq should be safe (especially if you’re using encryption), some of you may want to consider what this issue says about Backblaze. I’ve been a happy B2-via-Arq user since August, 2017, but am now re-evaluating the B2 part. Wasabi would be the apparent logical second choice on a price/performance-comparison basis, but I certainly am open to hearing about some of the other choices available via Arq (Storage Locations (arqbackup.com).
FYI.