PDA

View Full Version : smart update didn't work due to remaining space problems


JohnCoffee
05-08-2005, 04:13 AM
I have a 500Gb firewire drive partioned into 6 partitions. After the initial backup of every partition, which took about 60-90min for each, I was about to smart update after a week of work.

On the initial backup (Panther was installed at that time on that drive), my 60GB harddisk was almost full (used 59.1GB).
During my working week, the used space on my harddisk decreased to 47GB (I installed Tiger and did some drive housekeeping)

When doing the first smart update with SD, the procedure had been stopped with errors however, since a "out of space error" had been created.


|10:49:39 AM|Info| SuperDuper!, version 74, path: /Applications/SuperDuper!.app, OS: 10.4 (8A428)
|10:49:39 AM|Info| Source Drive: /, name: Panther, device: /dev/disk2s3 type: hfs, OS: 10.4 (8A428), capacity: 61.81 GB, used: 46.30 GB, directories: 56596, files: 251047
|10:49:39 AM|Info| Target Drive: /Volumes/Panther Backup, name: Panther Backup, device: /dev/disk3s3 type: hfs, OS: 10.3.9 (7W98), capacity: 61.88 GB, used: 59.18 GB, directories: 69307, files: 322510
.
.
.
.
|10:55:55 AM|Error| : No space left on device


Does this mean that smart update copies new files first and then deletes the old ones afterwards? (Thus needing more space...)
Or has this been caused by the Tiger update only?

Thanks for a short info.
John

dnanian
05-08-2005, 10:42 AM
SuperDuper! doesn't copy first, but it does do everything in "one pass". So, as it traverses the file folders in "natural order", when we hit things we need to delete, we delete them... when we hit things we need to copy, we copy them.

When you get to the point where you're almost full and radical changes are made, you're more likely to run into a problem where a transient condition exists where more space is needed than you have.

We could have traversed the entire drive, figured out what to delete, and then delete before copy. Of course, in that situation, if there's a problem copying new files, you could end up with a backup missing all sorts of files, which isn't good either. I think you'll run into this situation far, far less often.

Hope that helps explain what you're seeing.