Big Sur finally uses APFS snapshots for Time Machine backups!

[Pimmp]

I did move the old backup to a new folder and then started time machine and did a new backup.
Time machine said no earlier bacjup was made and started fresh
Worked well, i think it goes faster but that might just be imagination.

 

[netnothing]

What is the recommended procedure now for a USB attached HDD to use Time Machine on Big Sur?

- Format the drive as APFS encrypted
- Select it as the TM drive - using the Encrypted option

This is what I did - and it seems to be working - but subsequent backups are being really slow. I also notice that the volume is APFS (Case-sensitive, Encrypted). I didn't format it as Case-sensitive - I think TM did that?

I am also noticing some big subsequent backups (9GB) - even though nothing changed.

 

[Weaselboy]

I did the same as you and mine also now shows case-sensitive. I am positive I selected only APFS Encrypted when I formatted, so TM must have switched it to case-sensitive.

I am actually noticing pretty good speed increase with TM compared to HFS+.

 

[netnothing]

I did the same as you and mine also now shows case-sensitive. I am positive I selected only APFS Encrypted when I formatted, so TM must have switched it to case-sensitive.

I am actually noticing pretty good speed increase with TM compared to HFS+.

Good to know, thanks. Are you backing up to a spinning HDD or an SSD? Mine is a spinning HDD.

Backups have been a bit better. I noticed the Sys Prefs screen for the time remaining to be wildly inaccurate right now - not that I normally watch it, was just curious since the switch.

 

[Weaselboy]

Using a potable HDD.

 

[netnothing]

I did the same as you and mine also now shows case-sensitive. I am positive I selected only APFS Encrypted when I formatted, so TM must have switched it to case-sensitive.

I am actually noticing pretty good speed increase with TM compared to HFS+.

If you don't mind me asking, how much data are you backing up?

I'm currently backing up about 2.3TB from 2 drives, my iMac internal SSD and a 4TB data drive (2.2TB used).

I keep getting backups like this:

Again, a 9GB backup and it is taking forever!

Not sure if something it wrong.

 

[netnothing]

So doing some testing - I wiped my backup drive. I re-partitioned the disk as a single Mac OS Extended (Journaled) - I noticed there is no longer an option is Disk Utility to create a Mac OS Extended Encrypted partition? Maybe that's been gone for a while and I haven't noticed.

I selected the disk as a new TM disk and chose the Encrypt Backups option. Big Sur re-partitioned the drive as a APFS (Case-sensitive, Encrypted).

I then stopped that, and re-partitioned the disk again back to Mac OS Ext. I then selected it again in TM but this time did not choose to encrypt the backup. Bug Sur still re-partitioned the drive as APFS (Case-sensitive), just not encrypted.

So looks like if you are starting with a new disk in Big Sur, it will always format as APFS.

 

[Weaselboy]

If you don't mind me asking, how much data are you backing up?

My whole drive is about 70 GB and the initial backup of that completed in a couple hours or so. Subsequent backup take only a couple minutes since I don't have much new or changed data.

 

[gilby101]

So looks like if you are starting with a new disk in Big Sur, it will always format as APFS.

Yes. That, along with case-sensitive, has been true through the beta phase since August (maybe before).

 

[h9826790]

I just completely remove one of my old TM backup, formatted the drive to APFS, and try APFS TM backup. Surprisingly, it's much faster than I expect.

The total backup size is 2.66TB, which usually take more than a day for the initial backup to complete.

But this time, it only took ~10 hours to complete (start at about 3:30am, and finished at about 1:30pm. The asymmetrical activities before 3:30am are for something else, I haven't start the backup yet). And this is the disks' usages during that period.

2.66TB for 10 hours, the average speed is ~77.5MB/s, which fits the graph quite well.

The source drives are one SATA SSD (MX500 2TB, contain Big Sur, many uses data, mainly small files) + one HDD (WD Red 4TB, use data only, mainly contain videos + photos).

The TM drive is a SATA connected HDD (WD Wed 6TB).

Of course, there are two variables here (macOS, and TM drive file system). It can be because Big Sur Time Machine is faster. However, I think this is at least good enough to prove Big Sur + APFS TM backup won't be slower than before. Or there will be any significant slow down if we use APFS for the backup drive.

For those having slow backup issue, that should because of something else (e.g. network speed).

 

[Prorege1]

APFS will only work for Big Sur? Problem is I also have another older iMac on High Sierra backing up to the same disks as my other Macs on Big Sur.

 

[h9826790]

APFS will only work for Big Sur? Problem is I also have another older iMac on High Sierra backing up to the same disks as my other Macs on Big Sur.

Big sure only.

 

[canhaz]

Anyone tried APFS either in internal time capsule or USB drive plugged into Time Capsule?

So ok direct USB works. However that defeats the purpose of remote backup. It ought to work over the network too. If someone steals your MacBook, they're likely to also take any connected drives. A server in the locked basement is an improvement.

 

[Weaselboy]

Anyone tried APFS either in internal time capsule or USB drive plugged into Time Capsule?

I can't find the post now, but I read where APFS does work with a TC. The TC drive is still formatted HFS+ like it always was, but the sparse bundle file used by TM is formatted to APFS with Bug Sur.

Edit: Here it is.

macOS 11.0 Big Sur: The Ars Technica review

Yes, you read that right—Mac OS X (or macOS 10?) is no more.

arstechnica.com

That doesn’t really change much in Big Sur, except that the sparsebundle is now APFS-formatted, and, when you open it, it acts the same way a local backup disk does. Our speed testing also showed improvements over the old HFS+ version of Time Machine when using a networked volume, though it was admittedly more modest than when using a local disk.

 

[h9826790]

Anyone tried APFS either in internal time capsule or USB drive plugged into Time Capsule?

So ok direct USB works. However that defeats the purpose of remote backup. It ought to work over the network too. If someone steals your MacBook, they're likely to also take any connected drives. A server in the locked basement is an improvement.

I don't know, but I highly doubt if it can work that way.

For remote drive, the drive must be formatted to allow read/write by the remote host (in this case, a Time Capsule).

And there is no record about any TC firmware update provide APFS support.

 

[Weaselboy]

And there is no record about any TC firmware update provide APFS support.

Our posts kinda overlapped, so may have missed it, but it looks like the TC still uses HFS+ and the sparse bundle made by Big Sur is in APFS so the TC does not need to support APFS.

 

[canhaz]

Thanks. Guess someone just needs to try it and let us know 😂. I'll do it but may take a while cos still on Catalina.

dont mind ditching TC either. Primary requirement is non-physically local backups.

 

[kworden0]

Mine is on a NAS (SMB3, zfs backed), it didn't (nor did it offer to) get converted into APFS.




I've created another share, so it creates another backup, on my NAS (same as above) and it does default to a APFS sparsebundle.
View attachment 928700

Not a developer. Can you walk me through the process of creating an APFS image over SMB?

 

[chrfr]

I don't know, but I highly doubt if it can work that way.

For remote drive, the drive must be formatted to allow read/write by the remote host (in this case, a Time Capsule).

And there is no record about any TC firmware update provide APFS support.

There's no need for APFS support on the Time Capsule itself. Time Machine mounts a disk image from the Time Capsule, so the disk format on the Time Capsule itself is irrelevant. I made a new backup on my Time Capsule to test, and the disk image is stored on the HFS+ disk of the Time Capsule but the format of the disk image itself is indeed APFS.

 

[h9826790]

There's no need for APFS support on the Time Capsule itself. Time Machine mounts a disk image from the Time Capsule, so the disk format on the Time Capsule itself is irrelevant. I made a new backup on my Time Capsule to test, and the disk image is stored on the HFS+ disk of the Time Capsule but the format of the disk image itself is indeed APFS.

So, if you formatted a TC's internal drive, and start a new backup from Big Sur TC. That will become an APFS image file inside a HFS+ disk?

That's interesting, the HDD in my TC is faulty. I can't test this on my setup. Let's see if any other members can achieve the same thing.

 

[chrfr]

So, if you formatted a TC's internal drive, and start a new backup from Big Sur TC. That will become an APFS image file inside a HFS+ disk?

Yes, that's how it works. When you connect a disk over a network, the client system has no knowledge of the format of the drive on the server.

 

[hoodafoo]

The disk in the Time Capsule will always be formatted HFS+. That has not and will never change (especially now that the Time Capsule is long discontinued)

What did change is the filesystem inside the sprasebundle that MacOS created to do backups to. THAT filesystem is now APFS with Big Sur. However, the sparsebundle itself is still sitting on an HFS+ formatted disk in the Time Capsule.

Think of it as a hierarchy:

- Time capsule
-- HFS+ disk shared over the network
----- sparsebundle on that HFS+ disk
------ APFS filesystem inside the sparsebundle
---------Snapshot of your Mac date A
---------Snapshot of your Mac date B

etc...

The first two lines in that hierarchy have not changed.

Hell, right now I'm doing Time Machine backups (from Catalina) to an SMB share on my Linux server, to a ZFS dataset! It doesn't really matter what the underlying filesystem is that a sparsebundle is on. A sparsebundle is basically just a disk image that's split into hundreds of small segments (bands) to make it more friendly to backup systems.

I already tested Time Machine from my Big Sur laptop to that same server and it works great. The irony is that it's using a copy on write filesystem (APFS) inside a disk image that's stored on another copy on write filesystem (ZFS).

Any reason why you're avoiding the term 'file format' and instead saying 'filesystem'. You're confusing the hell out of everyone.

 

[zorinlynx]

Any reason why you're avoiding the term 'file format' and instead saying 'filesystem'. You're confusing the hell out of everyone.

Because "filesystem" is the correct term here. It dictates how files are stored on the disk.

APFS = APple FileSystem
HFS = Hierarchical FileSystem

 

[hoodafoo]

Because "filesystem" is the correct term here. It dictates how files are stored on the disk.

APFS = APple FileSystem
HFS = Hierarchical FileSystem

The sparse bundle is a FILE on a file system, is it not?

 

[viettanium]

in Big Sur, my backup tasks to AirPort Time Capsule is very slow except the first complete one.