Prev: Buying a MacBook Pro
Next: Can I use iBook RAM in new MacBook?
From: commiebastard on 9 Feb 2010 21:55
On Feb 9, 2:52 pm, Nick Naym <nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>
wrote:
> In article bc3b3502-907a-41ff-afc7-1bd30699f...(a)u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com,
> commiebastard at oraclmas...(a)gmail.com wrote on 2/8/10 9:52 PM:
>
> > What are your experiences?
>
> > I mean, it's supposed to be intuitive to learn, but I find it really
> > counterintuitive for the stuff I do.
>
> I found it intuitive enough to enable me -- someone who is still not
> comfortable using Terminal -- to quickly create an "application" that
> automatically quits any open MS apps and perform a scheduled backup of my MS
> identity database (which I have excluded from my Time Machine backups). (I
> admit that the "real" solution for me is to trash my Entourage email client
> altogether and move on to something that's better designed, but until I
> do....)
>
> > I've been a Macbook Pro user since 2004, and between the bash
> > scripting, various shell scripting, and Applescript, I've been able to
> > do everything from manage a > 10 GB database, host a message board,
> > program 3D games and manage thousands of photographs as a batch and
> > I've never touched automator.
>
> More power to you. The fact that you are so well-versed in scripting and
> command-lining suggests that you don't need Automator...or any GUI, for that
> matter.

Being the proud user of a triple boot Slackware 13/GNU Darwin OS/OS X
MacBook Pro, I cannot disagree with you.

>Perhaps you should unhook OS X's entire front end?

Someone already did. It's called Darwin OS.


>
> > Why is it taking up space on my computer?
>
> Not nearly as much as OS X's GUI.
>
> --
> iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) € OS X (10.5.8)

From: Nick Naym on 9 Feb 2010 23:38
In article
92393333-3e2f-4d20-a0b9-5b2f7a2431b2(a)d27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
commiebastard at oraclmaster(a)gmail.com wrote on 2/9/10 9:51 PM:

> On Feb 9, 7:02 pm, Nick Naym <nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>> In article tph-7922A7.15134409022010(a)localhost, Tom Harrington at
>> t...(a)pcisys.no.spam.dammit.net wrote on 2/9/10 5:13 PM:
>>
>>
>>
>>> In article <tom_stiller-615784.15390509022...(a)news.individual.net>,
>>>  Tom Stiller <tom_stil...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> In article <C7972724.5261C%nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>,
>>>>  Nick Naym <nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>> I found it intuitive enough to enable me -- someone who is still not
>>>>> comfortable using Terminal -- to quickly create an "application" that
>>>>> automatically quits any open MS apps and perform a scheduled backup of my
>>>>> MS
>>>>> identity database (which I have excluded from my Time Machine backups). (I
>>>>> admit that the "real" solution for me is to trash my Entourage email
>>>>> client
>>>>> altogether and move on to something that's better designed, but until I
>>>>> do....)
>>
>>>> I replaced the Microsoft User Data file on my wife's account with a
>>>> sparse bundle disk image mounted as her ~/Documents/Microsoft User Data.
>>
>>>> Now TimeMachine just does its thing, the backup remains a reasonable
>>>> size and I can forget about a separate backup scheme.
>>
>>> Does Time Machine have problems with this folder?
>>
>> No. It's the nature of the monolithic MS database that's the problem. Tom
>> Stiller's approach may address some of the size issue, but it doesn't
>> address the constant creation of backups even when little actual data has
>> changed.
>>
>>> I'm not sure why
>>> these steps are necessary.
>>
>> Entourage emails are stored in a single database, which (as you would
>> expect) quickly becomes quite large. It also means that the database is
>> constantly changing. Consequently, even if you only receive a single email
>> between backups, Time Machine will be forced to back up your entire email
>> database every time Time Machine runs. Having TM constantly backing up the
>> database when little has changed is a waste of resources that can affect
>> performance and may generate unnecessary wear and tear.
>>
>> A "solution" seems to be to exclude the database from TM's backup routine,
>> and to instead save copies of it periodically (say, every 2 or 3 hours) to a
>> "Email Database Backup" folder on your HD. This is the "work around"
>> approach to saving the database less often than TM's normal schedule would
>> otherwise require.
>>
>> One of the problems with this, however, is that it was discovered that any
>> changes that might be going on with the actual database (say, you're sending
>> an email) while you were backing up the database to that internal folder can
>> lead to corruption. So, you needed to be sure that Entourage wasn't running
>> while you were making those 2-3 hour backups.
>>
>> But wait...there's more!
>>
>> It was also discovered that the same was true if the Microsoft Database
>> Daemon was running during the backup...so that needed to be quit as well.
>>
>> But wait, there's STILL more...
>>
>> In fact, it seems that database corruption was a possibility if ANY
>> Microsoft application was running during that periodic database update.
>>
>> Bottom line: Because it's Microsoft, nothing is easy. If Rube Goldberg were
>> alive today, he'd have a lifetime's worth of material for his cartoon strip.
>>
>> --
>> iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) € OS X (10.5.8)
>
> I heard that rsync is able to backup only changes to files, so it
> might be another solution to the problem of saving the large
> monolithic database file.

Hmmm...If true, it may mean that it would be easy for a GUI user like me to
do what needs to be done via backuplist+.app.

--
iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) • OS X (10.5.8)

From: Nick Naym on 9 Feb 2010 23:39
In article 584629ab-0652-4bff-9a55-651f56eeca03(a)1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com,
commiebastard at oraclmaster(a)gmail.com wrote on 2/9/10 9:55 PM:

> On Feb 9, 2:52�pm, Nick Naym <nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>> In article bc3b3502-907a-41ff-afc7-1bd30699f...(a)u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com,
>> commiebastard at oraclmas...(a)gmail.com wrote on 2/8/10 9:52 PM:
>>
>>> What are your experiences?
>>
>>> I mean, it's supposed to be intuitive to learn, but I find it really
>>> counterintuitive for the stuff I do.
>>
>> I found it intuitive enough to enable me -- someone who is still not
>> comfortable using Terminal -- to quickly create an "application" that
>> automatically quits any open MS apps and perform a scheduled backup of my MS
>> identity database (which I have excluded from my Time Machine backups). (I
>> admit that the "real" solution for me is to trash my Entourage email client
>> altogether and move on to something that's better designed, but until I
>> do....)
>>
>>> I've been a Macbook Pro user since 2004, and between the bash
>>> scripting, various shell scripting, and Applescript, I've been able to
>>> do everything from manage a > 10 GB database, host a message board,
>>> program 3D games and manage thousands of photographs as a batch and
>>> I've never touched automator.
>>
>> More power to you. The fact that you are so well-versed in scripting and
>> command-lining suggests that you don't need Automator...or any GUI, for that
>> matter.
>
> Being the proud user of a triple boot Slackware 13/GNU Darwin OS/OS X
> MacBook Pro, I cannot disagree with you.
>
>> Perhaps you should unhook OS X's entire front end?
>
> Someone already did. It's called Darwin OS.
>
>

So why are you complaining? ;)




--
iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) � OS X (10.5.8)

From: Andrew Brydon on 10 Feb 2010 00:46
Once upon a time, j <nospam53709(a)invalid.invalid> wrote
>Kir�ly <me(a)home.spamsucks.ca> wrote:
>
>> commiebastard <oraclmaster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> > What are your experiences?
>>
>
>- Backup recently modified files in a project folder onto a mounted disk
>image. Each time it's run, a new date/time-stamped folder is created - a
>sort of poor-man's incremental backup, but very handy on big, complex
>projects where you get paranoid about overwriting something.
>

Ironically, I do that task with Applescript, though it's one of
the few I've done. Did get a status bar working with it though.

Mostly use Automator for batch-renaming files in a folder: quick and
easy to set up (i.e. re-open a saved workflow) but it does seem a
bit slow in executing.

--
Andrew Brydon
Life is just the beta-version of death
From: Tom Stiller on 10 Feb 2010 06:53
In article <C79761D0.526AF%nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>,
Nick Naym <nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

> In article tph-7922A7.15134409022010(a)localhost, Tom Harrington at
> tph(a)pcisys.no.spam.dammit.net wrote on 2/9/10 5:13 PM:
>
> > In article <tom_stiller-615784.15390509022010(a)news.individual.net>,
> > Tom Stiller <tom_stiller(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <C7972724.5261C%nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>,
> >> Nick Naym <nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I found it intuitive enough to enable me -- someone who is still not
> >>> comfortable using Terminal -- to quickly create an "application" that
> >>> automatically quits any open MS apps and perform a scheduled backup of my
> >>> MS
> >>> identity database (which I have excluded from my Time Machine backups).
> >>> (I
> >>> admit that the "real" solution for me is to trash my Entourage email
> >>> client
> >>> altogether and move on to something that's better designed, but until I
> >>> do....)
> >>
> >> I replaced the Microsoft User Data file on my wife's account with a
> >> sparse bundle disk image mounted as her ~/Documents/Microsoft User Data.
> >>
> >> Now TimeMachine just does its thing, the backup remains a reasonable
> >> size and I can forget about a separate backup scheme.
> >
> > Does Time Machine have problems with this folder?
>
> No. It's the nature of the monolithic MS database that's the problem. Tom
> Stiller's approach may address some of the size issue, but it doesn't
> address the constant creation of backups even when little actual data has
> changed.
>
>
> > I'm not sure why
> > these steps are necessary.
>
> Entourage emails are stored in a single database, which (as you would
> expect) quickly becomes quite large. It also means that the database is
> constantly changing. Consequently, even if you only receive a single email
> between backups, Time Machine will be forced to back up your entire email
> database every time Time Machine runs. Having TM constantly backing up the
> database when little has changed is a waste of resources that can affect
> performance and may generate unnecessary wear and tear.
>
> A "solution" seems to be to exclude the database from TM's backup routine,
> and to instead save copies of it periodically (say, every 2 or 3 hours) to a
> "Email Database Backup" folder on your HD. This is the "work around"
> approach to saving the database less often than TM's normal schedule would
> otherwise require.
>
> One of the problems with this, however, is that it was discovered that any
> changes that might be going on with the actual database (say, you're sending
> an email) while you were backing up the database to that internal folder can
> lead to corruption. So, you needed to be sure that Entourage wasn't running
> while you were making those 2-3 hour backups.
>
> But wait...there's more!
>
> It was also discovered that the same was true if the Microsoft Database
> Daemon was running during the backup...so that needed to be quit as well.
>
> But wait, there's STILL more...
>
> In fact, it seems that database corruption was a possibility if ANY
> Microsoft application was running during that periodic database update.
>
> Bottom line: Because it's Microsoft, nothing is easy. If Rube Goldberg were
> alive today, he'd have a lifetime's worth of material for his cartoon strip.

Since Time Machine was designed to operate while the file system was
active (in unpredictable ways), it would seem that the sparsebundle
approach avoids all these issues.

--
Tom Stiller

PGP fingerprint = 5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3 7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Buying a MacBook Pro
Next: Can I use iBook RAM in new MacBook?