Time Machine

[Phil O]

Been doing the google search thing and can't find exactly what I'm looking for. I thought one of you Time Machine gurus might have the answer.

I've found several articles on how to set up multiple Time Machine drives, but they are redundant. What I'd like to do is set up multiple backups for multiple drives. For example, Time Machine 1 for my boot drive, Time Machine 2 for my studio drive, etc. So that Time Machine backups are kept separate for separate drives in my CheeseGrater Mac. Is this possible?

Phil

[HCMarkus]

What I'd like to do is set up multiple backups for multiple drives. Is this possible?

Phil

To my knowledge, no. It seems Apple designed Time Machine to be as simple as possible to use as a "no-brainer back up everything" utility.

Of course, you can exclude any folder/drive from backups, but this is a global TM setting.

Maybe I'm missing something, but that's the view from my elevation.

[stubbsonic]

Could you set up CCC (Carbon Copy Cloner) as a scheduled backup util for your studio drive? Then exclude your studio drive from the T.M. process.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

I concur. No es possiiblé. FWIW, I have redundant back up on two 4TB spinners and keep manual backups (non-TM) on a few separate spinners. VIs don't change much so I don't waste space on backing those hogs up to TM. A few other drives for important stuff I want triple backed up (like my art and certain scores, images, etc.) Not only is that more efficient on my system, but backups take much less time.

I also moved all my photos and iTunes stuff to an external spinner. A little of a PITA to power it up sometimes, but my system drive (1TB) is much happier.

[bayswater]

Time Machine has options to include or exclude drive or files, but it runs once, and in one instance. I'm sure you could set up scripts to run it multiple times, each with different exclusion options but that's a lot of futzing about.

Why do you want different drive on different backups? What's the advantage?

[Phil O]

Why do you want different drive on different backups? What's the advantage?

I have several 320GB and 500GB drives that I could use but no drives big enough to back up my whole system (about 1.5 TB spread out over 4 drives with multiple partitions in a MacPro tower). I was hoping to set something up with what I have. If I could divide things up all would be good - and cheap.

Phil

[mikehalloran]

We all like to save money but the WD Reds are inexpensive, run cool, have oversized bearings and about as close to bulletproof as you will get. 1–12TB
https://www.amazon.com/Red-10TB-NAS-Har ... r=8-2&th=1

Replacing those old, very hot spinners with a large Red will pay for itself in energy savings. Yes, really. YMMV as to how long that will take.

To my knowledge, the only differences between the Red and Red Pro are price and warranty (3 vs 5 years). I use the Red and have never had one go down or give less than a perfect SMART test.


Otherwise, I agree with those who don't back up VIs to Time Machine. I archive mine every time I make changes which can be 6 months or more. Nothing fancy—I copy the folders over to a spinner and let the old ones overwrite.

[HCMarkus]

I use two of these for TM Backups:

https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Expansio ... 196&sr=8-4

Uses the Seagate Archive Drive; has been reliable for me to date. 8TB makes $140 go a long way. External enclosures are nice with a 6,1 Mac Pro, which has no internal drive bays.

[mothra]

Theres a good chance any WD USB drives you buy have Reds in them. The Elements used to be one of the most popular ones for people "drive shucking". They were cheaper than buying the Red's in a retail box by themselves.

[Phil O]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I guess I'll get a two of the big ass drives and have some redundancy, from the department of redundancy department. Again.

Philippe

[HCMarkus]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I guess I'll get a two of the big ass drives and have some redundancy, from the department of redundancy department. Again.

Philippe

I just wanted to re-post your post to emphasize the posting that you posted. So I am re-posting your post now. Details to follow.

[bayswater]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I guess I'll get a two of the big ass drives and have some redundancy, from the department of redundancy department. Again.

Philippe

I just wanted to re-post your post to emphasize the posting that you posted. So I am re-posting your post now. Details to follow.

Could you remind us by reposting the post you were reminding us of?

[MIDI Life Crisis]

I’d just like to add that... SQUIRREL!

[cuttime]

I just wanted to re-post your post to emphasize the posting that you posted. So I am re-posting your post now. Details to follow.

+1

[HCMarkus]

ex post facto.