TimeMachine no work

[Aldebaron]

Hello,
I have my timemachine no longer working properly and refusing to do rescues.
I have a 256gb macbook and have a new empty 1TB external hard drive. He replied that: Time machine could not create a local snapshot from which to back up because there was not enough free space on the source volume (s).

My macbook's hard drive is full.
Question how to get Time machine to work again?
Did the problem come from the fact that the source or room was full?
thank you in advance

 

[HDFan]

My macbook's hard drive is full.

I have a 256gb macbook and have a new empty 1TB external hard drive. He replied that: Time machine could not create a local snapshot from which to back up because there was not enough free space on the source volume (s).

You should keep a minimum of 20% free space on your hard disk. You might be able to do a backup with Carbon Copy Cloner, which is a better alternative to Time Machine which is subject to corruption. Or move some data onto the 1 TB external drive from your boot drive to give TM the space it needs for snapshots. Hopefully you can backup the data you are moving to another location as well in case it gets lost in the transfer.

You need a 3-2-2 backup strategy if you care about your data so you need more backup locations.

 

[Fishrrman]

Forget time machine.

Get CarbonCopyCloner here and try it:

Download CCC - Bombich Software

www.bombich.com

CCC is FREE to download and try for 30 days.

If the internal drive is "full", then it's time to start deleting items on it.
Throw out about 15-20gb of junk (movies are often a culprit), and see how it runs then...

 

[Phil77354]

Forget time machine.

Get CarbonCopyCloner. . .

I've noticed that you regularly offer this advice in forum discussions here, whenever backup approaches are discussed.

I've always used Time Machine, without really considering other alternatives. I've rarely needed to make use of a Time Machine backup, but when I have tried to do that, it did seem to work just fine.

Still, I want to be sure that my backups are done accurately and are secure. When I look at the website for CarbonCopyCloner, the description of how it works looks very similar to Time Machine.

I don't automatically think that everything Apple does is better than what someone else can do, but I would be very interested to know why you feel so strongly that CarbonCopyCloner is superior to Apple's own product?

 

[Apple_Robert]

I've noticed that you regularly offer this advice in forum discussions here, whenever backup approaches are discussed.

I've always used Time Machine, without really considering other alternatives. I've rarely needed to make use of a Time Machine backup, but when I have tried to do that, it did seem to work just fine.

Still, I want to be sure that my backups are done accurately and are secure. When I look at the website for CarbonCopyCloner, the description of how it works looks very similar to Time Machine.

I don't automatically think that everything Apple does is better than what someone else can do, but I would be very interested to know why you feel so strongly that CarbonCopyCloner is superior to Apple's own product?

TimeMachine works well when it does what it is supposed to do. In my opinion, the biggest problem with TimeMachine is you often don't find out you have a problem with the backup, until you try and retrieve it from TimeMachine. TimeMachine only seems to check integrity of the sparse bundle when it has started the process of creating a new backup. Sometimes, it will alert you that the bundle is corrupt and is no good. If that is your only backup, you are screwed.

With Carbon Copy Cloner, it verifies the accuracy and integrity of each backup. A user won't have to wonder if the backup was successful and valid, unlike TimeMachine.

With Intel Macs, CCC is much faster and provides the ability to boot from the clone. It is also much quicker to restore a Mac using CCC, than it is with TimeMachine (on the Intel side).

With the M1, my TimeMachine backups have been just as fast as with CCC.

TimeMachine is excellent for restoring a file you accidentally deleted or was corrupt.

Both products are similar to one another but, I don't think TimeMachine should be dismissed right away each time backups are discussed.

 

[Phil77354]

. . . With Carbon Copy Cloner, it verifies the accuracy and integrity of each backup. A user won't have to wonder if the backup was successful and valid, unlike TimeMachine. . .

Thanks for the helpful information.

I notice that my Time Machine backups have recently (past few months) been more noticeable because the drive I am backing up to is getting louder. For that reason, I've recently purchased a couple of new external hard drives and I'm getting ready to move my Music files (presently stored on one drive) to one of my new drives, and also begin a fresh Time Machine backup using another of the new drives. I don't want to wait until the current backup drive (WD My Book, 2 yrs old) fails. I have Time Machine set up to backup both my computer hard drive (SSD), and my separate Music drive.

I'm comfortable moving to Carbon Copy Cloner if there is an advantage in doing that. In fact, with my present availability of hard drives, I could set up one for Time Machine, and another for CCC. Maybe I'll do that . . .

Added - thinking about it, I do wish that Time Machine provided some flexibility in setting up the frequency of backups. I am not changing or adding files so frequently that it is necessary for TM to be running every hour, but that seems to be how it works, period! It looks to me that CCC would give me that flexibility, and I could control how often backups are made. I like that.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Thanks for the helpful information.

I notice that my Time Machine backups have recently (past few months) been more noticeable because the drive I am backing up to is getting louder. For that reason, I've recently purchased a couple of new external hard drives and I'm getting ready to move my Music files (presently stored on one drive) to one of my new drives, and also begin a fresh Time Machine backup using another of the new drives. I don't want to wait until the current backup drive (WD My Book, 2 yrs old) fails. I have Time Machine set up to backup both my computer hard drive (SSD), and my separate Music drive.

I'm comfortable moving to Carbon Copy Cloner if there is an advantage in doing that. In fact, with my present availability of hard drives, I could set up one for Time Machine, and another for CCC. Maybe I'll do that . . .

Added - thinking about it, I do wish that Time Machine provided some flexibility in setting up the frequency of backups. I am not changing or adding files so frequently that it is necessary for TM to be running every hour, but that seems to be how it works, period! It looks to me that CCC would give me that flexibility, and I could control how often backups are made. I like that.

That is true. CCC does offer more flexibility in scheduling than TimeMachine. I have CCC set to backup once a month. My main TM backup is 24/7 to Time Capsule and then I have another TM backup I manually connect whenever I feel I need to.

 

[Phil77354]

I just downloaded CCC and am reading through their instructions and help files.

One of the first questions is whether or not I want the backup to be a bootable copy of my OS. That requires CCC to either re-format the drive I am selecting for the backup, or for me to establish a separate partition on that drive that is APFS.

To begin with, having a bootable copy is already something not offered by Time Machine backups (right?). That is good, but it means I need to stop to think about that and look at their help files.

Almost immediately I came across their recommendations for backup drives. Sure enough, the two hard drives that I have recently purchased are not recommended by CCC to use as a bootable backup (LaCie Mobile Drive).

CCC recommends several external drives, mostly Oyen drives - a brand that until today I have never even heard of.

Now I'm regretting purchasing the LaCie drives, even though they are probably just fine. I do regret making the mistake of purchasing a 5400 RPM drive, that is something I should have been looking for. Of course, this information (the drive speed) is not provided on LaCie's own product page or spec sheet for these drives, not on the Amazon page either. I'm sure I could have found it, had I done enough research.

 

[pmiles]

What are you essentially trying to recover from a backup... a single music file, a word document? Or are you hoping to basically restore the system to a set date in time? Meaning that on Friday you deleted your drive by mistake so you want to go to your last backup and restore it back to what it was on the date of the last backup?

Most people have zero need for the latter. What they typically need is only the data used by all their apps... Safari bookmarks, address book contacts, word documents, music files, movies, etc. The apps that create those files are typically easily downloaded from the source and don't need to be backed up along with the data. The data that they create, however, is the one thing that you do need to keep a copy of.

All people need is an external drive to copy the important data too. You don't need third party applications for this simple form of backup. Because you set up the directory structure, you know exactly where to search for your data files. It eats up far less disk space than a full-on drive copy... not to mention it is faster. You can quickly test the integrity of the copy by launching the file. If you're paranoid, you can even encrypt it... but keep in mind, all you are really doing is making it harder for you to recover your own files. A competent thief can break any encryption if they care to. Most don't care to. Should the drive fail, it's the same story as any drive failure... doesn't matter whether it was your physical copy, a TimeMachine backup or CCC... they all suffer the same outcome. Hence the need for 2 backups for all things you can't possibly live without.

Now if the latter actually is your cup of tea, then you need a third party app or TimeMachine to do so. But like all push-here-dummy solutions, they aren't bullet-proof. So in the end, you end up restoring your drive to OS whatever and then re-download all your apps... only now you don't have any of your data to go with it because it was packaged with all the other crap that made up your entire drive.

Set it and forget it... is more akin to assume it is actually doing what you think it is until you find out it isn't. You need to proactively save those files that you know you can't recreate. It's the quickest, simplest, sure-fire way to keep a copy of your important files. Everything else is just more complicated... and as such, have more potential for failure when you least expect it.

 

[Fishrrman]

Phil wrote:
"I just downloaded CCC and am reading through their instructions and help files"

Don't even bother.
Just open the CCC app and start using it.
It's THAT easy.

DON'T PAY ANY ATTENTION to the list of "recommended" drives.
Just use whatever drive you have, and don't worry about it.
You're gonna have to trust me on this.

 

[HDFan]

DON'T PAY ANY ATTENTION to the list of "recommended" drives.
Just use whatever drive you have, and don't worry about it.

There are some drives to be avoided, but in general drive failure rates have halved in the last few years so drives with higher failure rates are much rarer now.

2020 Hard Drive Reliability Report by Make and Model

The AFR for 2020 dropped below 1% down to 0.93%. In 2019, it stood at 1.89%. That’s over a 50% drop year over year.

www.backblaze.com

 

[Phil77354]

Phil wrote:
"I just downloaded CCC and am reading through their instructions and help files"

Don't even bother.
Just open the CCC app and start using it.
It's THAT easy.

DON'T PAY ANY ATTENTION to the list of "recommended" drives.
Just use whatever drive you have, and don't worry about it.
You're gonna have to trust me on this.

Sure, it is easy to use, that doesn't mean that some users want to understand the options available before diving in.

It also occurs to me that having both CCC and Time Machine active might be - ok? Or not? Can it be problematic if they both happen to be writing an update to their respective backup file at the same time?

There are some drives to be avoided, but in general drive failure rates have halved in the last few years so drives with higher failure rates are much rarer now.

2020 Hard Drive Reliability Report by Make and Model

The AFR for 2020 dropped below 1% down to 0.93%. In 2019, it stood at 1.89%. That’s over a 50% drop year over year.

www.backblaze.com

Thanks, that is helpful info. I appreciate it.

 

[HDFan]

Sure, it is easy to use,

Well, sorta. It is easy to setup initially. However it has a lot of advanced options which are not obvious until you need them. To my embarrassment their excellent support has pointed out these manual sections to me when I ran into problems.

 

[Phil77354]

Well, sorta. It is easy to setup initially. However it has a lot of advanced options which are not obvious until you need them. To my embarrassment their excellent support has pointed out these manual sections to me when I ran into problems.

I was being kind of ironic, not suggesting that fully utilizing the software would be that easy (which is why I made my earlier point in the first place, that I was studying the instructions and help files).

 

[ignatius345]

All people need is an external drive to copy the important data too. You don't need third party applications for this simple form of backup. Because you set up the directory structure, you know exactly where to search for your data files. It eats up far less disk space than a full-on drive copy... not to mention it is faster. You can quickly test the integrity of the copy by launching the file. If you're paranoid, you can even encrypt it... but keep in mind, all you are really doing is making it harder for you to recover your own files. A competent thief can break any encryption if they care to. Most don't care to. Should the drive fail, it's the same story as any drive failure... doesn't matter whether it was your physical copy, a TimeMachine backup or CCC... they all suffer the same outcome. Hence the need for 2 backups for all things you can't possibly live without.

Now if the latter actually is your cup of tea, then you need a third party app or TimeMachine to do so. But like all push-here-dummy solutions, they aren't bullet-proof. So in the end, you end up restoring your drive to OS whatever and then re-download all your apps... only now you don't have any of your data to go with it because it was packaged with all the other crap that made up your entire drive.

Set it and forget it... is more akin to assume it is actually doing what you think it is until you find out it isn't. You need to proactively save those files that you know you can't recreate. It's the quickest, simplest, sure-fire way to keep a copy of your important files. Everything else is just more complicated... and as such, have more potential for failure when you least expect it.

Heartily agree on the multiple methods note. I run Time Machine backups for the every day stuff and for having versions of files in case something gets hosed. And I also use CCC to make an encrypted clone I keep in another location in case of distaster. As a last line of defense, all the really important stuff I have is in iCloud Drive.

In the event of a fire or something that took out my iMac and my Time Machine drive, I'd have that offsite clone and I'd have iCloud Drive files to fill in the gaps since the last time I made the clone.

Fisherrrman beats the anti-Time Machine drum tirelessly in every single discussion, but the fact is, Time Machine is dead simple to set up and works just fine. I've been using it since it came out and it's saved me on many many occasions. Bootable backups were important a decade ago, but now that Macs have a recovery partition I just don't see it as being necessary for the average user.