search for: fw800

...ention NAS ! How is it connected to the computer hosting "A" ? If via network then you've added *another* layer. > directly to the computer (Do you recommend USB2 or 1 Gb Ethernet? Or should I daisy chain external HD and NAS? Then it would look like this: > > Computer <--FW800--> HD <--USB2--> NAS Highly unlikely to work - the drive won't have a Firewire to USB bridge. Having the two different ports is to allow the drive to be connected to *a* host with either Firewire *OR* USB. > The other option is > > HD <--FW800--> Computer <--USB2 o...

Den 2016-01-26 kl. 09:06, skrev Simon Hobson: >>> >>The other option is >>> >> >>> >>HD <--FW800--> Computer <--USB2 or Ethernet 1000Mbit --> NAS >> > >> >If you use a network connection then you've still got that network layer. > Just thinking a bit more about that ... > > Is your normal setup : > NAS --ethernet--> Computer hosting A >...

Just chiming in here, I haven’t read all the previous posts so may be repeating… Mike Bombich has a good piece on benchmarks for various source/destination scenarios with rsync. https://bombich.com/kb/ccc3/how-long-should-clone-or-backup-take Note that copying to sparsebundle on local media is as fast as to local disk. Sparsebundle is a mac filesystem whereas NAS is not so certain file

...no incidence at all. Indeed, there were no reason for such a failure. Both disks (source and destination) are in HFS+, I use no rsync daemon but a simple rsync command... and it used to work well. The only difference I could see was: -backup work on my external hard-drive (5400rpm) through FW800 -backup does not work on another drive (7200rpm) through FW800 The only difference being the speed of the two disks, I tried to play with --bwlimit, but it did not work. Eventually, I tried to backup trough FireWire 400 instead... and it worked ! I cannot make any clever diagnostic, I do not...

Hi all, Trying to mount an FW800 6TB volumes. The logs say; cannot find hfs+ superblock and volumes larger then 2TB are not supported yet Is my case really because of the >2TB volume? Thanks in advance, - aurf

dbonde+forum+rsync.lists.samba.org at gmail.com wrote: > It is exactly as I wrote. On a network volume (A) a "sparse disk image bundle" (B), i.e., a type of disk image used in OS X, is stored. B is then mounted locally (i.e., local to where rsync is run) on a computer (C) where it appears as one of many volumes. > > In other words, B is stored on A. A is then mounted (using

Thank you. I will try your suggestions. First I will connect the NAS directly to the computer (Do you recommend USB2 or 1 Gb Ethernet? Or should I daisy chain external HD and NAS? Then it would look like this: Computer <--FW800--> HD <--USB2--> NAS The other option is HD <--FW800--> Computer <--USB2 or Ethernet 1000Mbit --> NAS But I still must say it is weird that rsync seems slower than Finder. I also might have a look at ditto or CpMac. On 2016-01-25 15:50, Simon Hobson wrote: > dbonde+for...

Hi all, I have a box, until warranty (I may not open it) and 2 external USB hard drives. My perfect solution is to open the box, plug the drives on the SATA slots, and use them. Unfortunately, I'll have to fall back to the cheap solution: I would like to use each external drive as physical volume (PV) and then "join" them as a VG in order to use a LVM composed by internal