CLONE Time Capsule to NAS continuously

[MrCheeto]

I have a Time Capsule that I'm backing up to.

I also have a WD RAID NAS.

I want to continue backing up to Time Capsule because of how convenient and seamless it is. Any time any of my Macs is connected to home wifi, it is set to backup. No credentials or mounting required, it's automatic. I'm not willing to change this seamlessness in any way.

I do, however, need some redundancy.

I bought a NAS and it's working as far as adding, editing, copying etc on the network across multiple machines.

I just want the NAS to be used to keep a running sync of my Time Capsule at all times. If the Time Capsule were to be corrupted for any reason, is there any way a NAS would be set up to prevent the corruption of my backups so I can pick up from there and carry on?

 

[BigBlur]

In case you aren't aware, a NAS can behave just like a Time Capsule if it supports Time Machine. I use a Synology NAS for my Time Machine backups...no credentials, no mounting, it's all automatic and seamless.

Does your WD RAID NAS support Time Machine? If so, you could just configure that to use with Time Machine in addition to your Time Capsule. Time Machine allows multiple backup destinations. This would allow you to have two separate backups running simultaneously, rather than trying to continuously clone your Time Capsule to your NAS.

Just to be sure to select 'Use Both' when adding the second Time Machine destination.

 

[MrCheeto]

I really like the seamlessness of one central backup destination. I don't want things to break just because something gets reassigned via DHCP or wonder if it's connected or not. If I'm on WiFI, I'm 100% guaranteed to be connected to my destination.

My NAS should be completely in the background and exist ONLY to copy whatever my TC is doing.

 

[satcomer]

I really like the seamlessness of one central backup destination. I don't want things to break just because something gets reassigned via DHCP or wonder if it's connected or not. If I'm on WiFI, I'm 100% guaranteed to be connected to my destination.

My NAS should be completely in the background and exist ONLY to copy whatever my TC is doing.

Just remember you have to make a share for Time Capsule on the NAS so Time Machine will not take the whole NAS! Just follow these steps in Synology:

 

[MrCheeto]

I don’t mind if the TC uses all of my NAS for backups.

Still not sure what to do here. I simply want something like rsync with the -a archive option to run every time a file is written to the TC.

I’m using a WD NAS with the crappy WD interface. The NAS is wired with a LAN cable to the TC. I can access the NAS on any network device.

I have a MBA I need to back up automatically with TM. When the backup commences, I want the NAS to update so it is always in sync with the TC. The goal is that I could pitch my TC if it gets a lightning strike or a bullet comes through the ceiling and hits it again, then restore from the NAS because it’s a perfect clone.

IDK. How can it be difficult to backup one drive to another automatically? I don’t want yet more software in between the operation, as WD’s user interface is annoying and crippling as it is.

 

[iStorm]

I really like the seamlessness of one central backup destination. I don't want things to break just because something gets reassigned via DHCP or wonder if it's connected or not. If I'm on WiFI, I'm 100% guaranteed to be connected to my destination.

My NAS should be completely in the background and exist ONLY to copy whatever my TC is doing.

If you aren't already, assign your NAS a static IP, which is best practice for a NAS. Then you should be 100% guaranteed to be connected to it all the time, and never have to worry about DHCP reassigning it or wonder if it's connected or not. Most routers can do this by assigning a static IP based on its MAC address, or you can set a static IP directly on the NAS itself by using an IP outside of the DHCP range your router uses. (ex. If your router reserves x.x.x.100 - x.x.x.149 for DHCP, then use x.x.x.150.) Also, depending on the NAS, you should be able to access it by using its name rather than by IP (ex. smb://MyNas/Share). I've never had an issue with my NAS not being found or being inaccessible.

I second BigBlur's post above. I've done that myself in the past when migrating between two NASes. Couple pros with this method is if one were to fail or get corrupted, there's a chance the other will still be good (rather than continuously cloning a potentially corrupted backup, which you don't know is corrupt until you try to use it). Secondly, it's all seamless and in the background without having to manage some other cloning/syncing process. It is a set-it-and-forget-it type of thing, just like how Time Capsules are. If your NAS doesn't support Time Machine functionality to expose a share on the network as a Time Caspsule, then this is all moot anyway.

---

Back to your question... The Time Machine backup is essentially just a virtual disk or sparse bundle. Perhaps you can get something like this working?

rsync on external drives with OS X sparse bundle images

blog.williamgoodall.name

Backing up Time Machine sparsebundles to another server

So, a while ago I backed up a couple of different Macs to my Linux-based fileserver. As a network Time Machine, each Mac has a separate sparsebundle file containing all of its information. I've since

apple.stackexchange.com

A potential challenge with this would be knowing when Time Machine isn't backing up so you can run the rsync job. This brings me back to my second point above. IMO, I believe it'd be simpler to just let Time Machine handle two backups if you can. Otherwise, the cloning would be a lot easier if you had two NASes of the same kind and could use their built-in replication tools.

 

[VideoFreek]

I just want the NAS to be used to keep a running sync of my Time Capsule at all times. If the Time Capsule were to be corrupted for any reason, is there any way a NAS would be set up to prevent the corruption of my backups so I can pick up from there and carry on?

How would the NAS know that the TC had been corrupted? It would simply continue blindly cloning the TC's sparse bundle, and so you would end up with two corrupted backups.

What you are proposing strikes me as a very dangerous practice, in that you'd be creating a single point of failure. Moreover, the TC has been out of production for several years now, and there have been reports of excessive failures with the hard drives that were used in the last generation of these devices. In any case, with hard drives generally, there is really no question about IF they will fail (they will), only WHEN. When hard drives begin to fail, data errors and corruption can happen, so you know the rest...

A much better approach is what others have suggested above: create a separate, independent backup on a separate device. Time Machine can handle this, seamlessly. Bear in mind that you should also have an offsite backup--your Time Capsule and NAS won't do you much good if your home burns to the ground or is robbed. Unfortunately, Time Machine cannot easily handle this.

The "seamlessness" you so highly value is not unique to Time Machine. Any decent backup solution should be largely a set-and-forget affair, and should be capable of creating multiple backups in multiple locations. For example, I use the excellent ARQ software to backup my Mac and Windows clients locally to a NAS and to the cloud (Backblaze B2), and I rarely need to think about it. I DO periodically audit my backups to make sure files are actually recoverable. So far, so good.

Hope this helps.

 

[MrCheeto]

Hey, your posts help a lot and I'm going to have to make a lot of notes and do research. There's a LOT of info here so I appreciate the excellent help, just need time to work it out!

 

[MrCheeto]

OK guys. A few questions come up.

Firstly let me clearly state that I do NOT want my Mac chugging out TWICE the amount of data over the network to maintain TWO different backups. I want that work load to go to the stationary hardware. With my MacBooks coming and going, I just want them to do their business and carry on QUICK.

I started a TM partition on my NAS a few months ago. Today I realized it hasn't backed up in about a month because the backup is corrupt and needs to start a new backup. Luckily, nothing of value was lost in this experiment. No clue why the sparsebundle just failed, but I think I've heard that if they lose connection during a backup, that it can be harmful?

When Time Machine completes a backup instance, which should occur like every hour I think, it doesn't have ANY means of knowing the health of the backup sparsebundle?

Is there a way to go back to the old way of backing up without the sparsebundle? It used to just create a Backupsdb folder and dump folders into that with every change made and links to existing data.

What is the DUMBEST NAS out there? I do NOT like software bloating up my workflow, being accessed through a browser which may or may not support it's flashy interface, requiring creating an online user account or requiring ANY internet access at all, crying and sending me emails about updates yada yada. I would rather just initialize through command line and know that it isn't trying to think for me. It does exactly what I told it to, and will not change or lose functionality because of patches and "improvements". A professional, no hand-holding, array is most preferred.

I get very frustrated when somebody programs something to think for people that aren't capable of thinking. Tends to lead to a too many cooks situation. Don't you hate when you open the door while parking precisely, but the car acts like a smart ass and engages the electronic parking brake as soon as it detects that the door is open and you're in D?

Still a tough pickle I'm in. I know a lot of people have solutions that work for them, but I'm picky about "new for the sake of new". It tends to get in my way and really impact my quality of life. I drive a 2003 American car (NOT a Chrysler or Chevy, don't worry) because it does exactly what a car should. It doesn't try to think for me, it doesn't argue with me, it does as I say.

So while a Hyundai with all the Social media crap and wireless charging appeals to a lot of people that need to have their hand held so they don't phase-out and get lost in a busy supermarket, I prefer my tools leave the thinking to me even if it requires, god forbid, concentration and knowledge.

Just saying, there may be more capable tools with more "user friendly" front-ends, but I like TV's and refrigerators that don't have a "boot up" time and software crashes.

 

[satcomer]

To me Time Machine is VERY basic backup system to DAS! if you mount a NAS share on your Mac then use the shareware Carbon Copy Cloner and use a better backup system!

 

[MrCheeto]

Time Machine is designed with OS X in mind and OS X is designed with Time Machine in mind. I can’t beat the UI of Time Machine either. No matter which Mac I use, whether it’s from 2008 or 2022, it uses the same utility and will look familiar across all Macs. Compatibility is not a question. If I get a new Mac I can load my user, apps, and settings before even starting to use it.

I believe I’ve found an answer but I’m looking into it more. Rather than a NAS controller, I could install Snow Leopard Server on one of my Mini’s to host all files across the network which could include a Time Machine partition. This solves my crappy interface/subscription plan problem. I see that there are utilities built into OS X that will do the archiving, which for instance is rsync. With a little bit of bash, I’m certain I could make it do regular backups after a Time Machine backup completes. Perhaps I could add a check for backup integrity before attempting to clone it, so if the TM library fails it will not back up the corrupted library. It’s just a matter of figuring out how TM sees broken libraries. I know it can do it because if you try to backup with a broken library, it will warn you to create a new backup.

 

[satcomer]

Time Machine is designed with OS X in mind and OS X is designed with Time Machine in mind. I can’t beat the UI of Time Machine either. No matter which Mac I use, whether it’s from 2008 or 2022, it uses the same utility and will look familiar across all Macs. Compatibility is not a question. If I get a new Mac I can load my user, apps, and settings before even starting to use it.

I believe I’ve found an answer but I’m looking into it more. Rather than a NAS controller, I could install Snow Leopard Server on one of my Mini’s to host all files across the network which could include a Time Machine partition. This solves my crappy interface/subscription plan problem. I see that there are utilities built into OS X that will do the archiving, which for instance is rsync. With a little bit of bash, I’m certain I could make it do regular backups after a Time Machine backup completes. Perhaps I could add a check for backup integrity before attempting to clone it, so if the TM library fails it will not back up the corrupted library. It’s just a matter of figuring out how TM sees broken libraries. I know it can do it because if you try to backup with a broken library, it will warn you to create a new backup.

You better of going with a modern Synology NAS and use one free Package Apps and do what you want with it!