Prev: Has anyone here tried the "Mackeeper" software? It's a clean-up & maintainance type suite.
Next: Hacking...???
From: TaliesinSoft on 18 May 2010 10:36
On 2010-05-17 16:32:24 -0500, Tom Stiller said:

[continuing in this thread which I opened with the assertion that Time
Machine keeps backups for the last 25 hours and not just 24 hours]

> But you have tampered with Time Machine's normal schedule by forcing it
> to backup exactly on the hour thereby introducing a "fencepost"
> situation (and letting Apple off the hook).

At this time I've temporarily shut off TimeMachineEditor to see if that
makes any difference in the number of recent backups kept. I'll post
the results when more than 24 hours have past since I made the change.


--
James Leo Ryan
Austin, Texas

From: Wes Groleau on 18 May 2010 10:36
On 05-18-2010 00:32, TaliesinSoft wrote:
> Oops, that first sentence should have stated "today's backups run from
> 12 AM to 11 PM (that's 24 backups)...." A backup, one I hadn't noticed
> was running while I was composing my response, and that brought about
> the change from 10 PM to 11 PM.

OK, you have just acknowledged that Time Machine considers the midnight
post to be the previous day. So, you have every hour for the current
day (as stated), and one more than promised for the day before.

Why all this fuss about an extra incrmental backup? I imagine
it's quite tiny, unless you did a huge amount of video editing
between ten and eleven PM.

And why so much fuss about which day the extra one is on?

--
Wes Groleau

The fight: learning and monitoring vs. acquisition and spontaneity
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=50
From: TaliesinSoft on 18 May 2010 10:55
On 2010-05-18 02:35:15 -0500, Richard Maine said:

> TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft(a)me.com> wrote:
>
>> I will have 25 consecutive hourly backups ending with the most recent, and
>> not the 24 that the Apple documentation states.
>
> As long as one is being that picky (and I'm not at all sure why you
> care, but I'll play along for one post at any rate), one should quote
> the documentation accurately. If you misquote it, then you don't get any
> credit towards the game of picking nits.

The first sentence in my opening posting in this thread was as follows:

The Time Machine documentation found at
<http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/time-machine.html> states
that "Time Machine saves the hourly backups for the past 24 hours,
daily backups for the past month, and weekly backups for everything
older than a month."

I think I fairly and correctly posted that sentence, but I'm certainly
open to having misinterpreted it.

> If your initial quote was accurate, it said nothing about "24 backups".
> It did say "for the past 24 hours", but that's not the same thing. It
> takes 25 hourly backups to completely cover 24 hours - that is to be
> able to restore to a time 24 hours ago. Right after you have made a
> backup, if you had only 24 hourly backups, the oldest would be from 23
> hours ago. Note that a backup has no information about covering some
> period of time; that backup from 23 hours ago doesn't somehow count as
> covering the 24'th hour because it was an hourly backup and thus has
> updates from the previous hour. What it has is a backup from one point
> in time, and that point was 23 hours ago.

My interpretation has been that each backup covers an hour in time so
that 24 backups would be needed to cover 24 hours. Any changes made
subsequent to the most recent backup will not be included until the
next backup occurs.

> If you want to argue with that... well... I think you'd be wrong, but
> regardless of that, misquoting looses you "points". To play the
> nitpicking game, you would need to quote the documentation accurately
> and then explain why you think it is equivalent to saying 24 backups.

I'm still puzzled as to why the suggestion that I failed to quote the
documentation accurately. The most recent backup covers the most recent
hour backed up, the second most recent backup the second most recent
hour backed up, and so on until the twenty-fourth most recent backup
which completes twenty four hours of consecutive backups.

> Forgetting that it takes n+1 points to bracket an interval that has a
> width of n times the point separation is actually a quite common basic
> programming error, often resulting in such things as exceeding array
> bounds.

Admittedly Time Machine may not include changes which have occurred
since the most recent backup, but each backup in the chan is complete
unto itself, including all changes committed between the time of the
preceding backup until its own completion.


--
James Leo Ryan
Austin, Texas

From: TaliesinSoft on 18 May 2010 11:01
On 2010-05-18 09:36:47 -0500, Wes Groleau said:

> On 05-18-2010 00:32, TaliesinSoft wrote:
>> Oops, that first sentence should have stated "today's backups run from
>> 12 AM to 11 PM (that's 24 backups)...." A backup, one I hadn't noticed
>> was running while I was composing my response, and that brought about
>> the change from 10 PM to 11 PM.
>
> OK, you have just acknowledged that Time Machine considers the midnight
> post to be the previous day. So, you have every hour for the current
> day (as stated), and one more than promised for the day before.

Actually between today and yesterday there are a total of 26 hourly
backups, 25 for the most recent hourly backups, and one more for the
yesterday midnight backup.

> Why all this fuss about an extra incrmental backup? I imagine
> it's quite tiny, unless you did a huge amount of video editing
> between ten and eleven PM.
>
> And why so much fuss about which day the extra one is on?

I wouldn't call it a fuss but a curiosity, and one where I am trying to
determine if I have truly misinterpreted something.

I do find it somewhat amusing that the "so much fuss" issue is raised
here when in other threads there are often literally hundreds of
"clever" comments which often have no relation to the originally posted
topic.


--
James Leo Ryan
Austin, Texas

From: Wes Groleau on 18 May 2010 11:19
On 05-18-2010 11:01, TaliesinSoft wrote:
> Actually between today and yesterday there are a total of 26 hourly
> backups, 25 for the most recent hourly backups, and one more for the
> yesterday midnight backup.

You implied yourself that one of those 25 is considered the previous
day, but ...
>> And why so much fuss about which day the extra one is on?

> I do find it somewhat amusing that the "so much fuss" issue is raised
> here when in other threads there are often literally hundreds of
> "clever" comments which often have no relation to the originally posted
> topic.

If you read those thread (and I hope you don't!) you might notice that
once in a great while I post some similar (and equally futile) attempt
to wind it down.

--
Wes Groleau

The fight: learning and monitoring vs. acquisition and spontaneity
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=50
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Has anyone here tried the "Mackeeper" software? It's a clean-up & maintainance type suite.
Next: Hacking...???