PDA

View Full Version : Why is my backup smaller than the original HD?


uelef
08-06-2005, 03:13 PM
I today backuped my Macintosh HD via SuperDuper! with the script "backup - all files". And now I'm a little bit confused that the clone FW disk has only 146 GB of data but my Macintosh HD has 176 GB.

Is this normal? Or is there something wrong with my backup?

Ulf
________
vaporizer forum (http://vaporizer.org/forum)

dnanian
08-06-2005, 03:18 PM
Ulf:

If you used "Backup - all files", it sounds like your source drive was chock full of temporary and swap files. But 30GB of swap/temp is a LOT. Has it been a long time since you last restarted this machine?

uelef
08-06-2005, 03:28 PM
Hey, Dave,

the fastest support I ever got... only 3 or 4 minutes.
No, I restart my Mac every day. The strange thing also is, that when I compare the shown folders of the both harddisks they almost have the same size (Applications, Applications (Mac OS 9), Library, System...).

I also have a problem with my G5 (dual 2.5 GHz with 2.5 GB RAM) that I cannot explain: It needs so much time to start with the Macintosh HD - especially the time from the login window until all autostart apps and files on my desktop are loaded. When I use the backup disk as starting volume the startup time is much shorter (about two times).
I discussed this phenomena on Mac Rumors forum (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=1596545#post1596545) but no-one could help me.

Ulf
________
Toyota Innova (http://www.toyota-wiki.com/wiki/Toyota_Innova)

dnanian
08-06-2005, 04:00 PM
Sounds, perhaps, like the internal drive is heavily fragmented, Ulf. You might want to consider iDefrag or its equivalent.

Regarding the difference in copy sizes -- again, the only thing that might account for this would be a lot of temporary or swap files. That would also make sense given what you found with your own "folder check"...

uelef
08-06-2005, 04:40 PM
Do you know a tool to clean up temporary and swap files? Maybe freeware?

I do not know why my harddisk should be heavily fragmented. I made a clean install with Mac OS X Tiger midth of May. And as far as I know Mac OS X automatically defrags files (except big ones).

Ulf
________
1000 (http://www.toyota-wiki.com/wiki/Subaru_1000)

dnanian
08-06-2005, 04:50 PM
Temporary and swap files should be cleaned up automatically every time you boot, Ulf. So -- that shouldn't be the problem. But, it's hard to know what your applications do.

Your hard disk might not be fragmented... but I don't know why it'd be so much slower than an external drive, given that it's a SATA unit. I assume that its SMART status is normal...

uelef
08-06-2005, 05:17 PM
I deleted all temporary and all swap files via Onyx - I also cleared log files and so on... The size of my Macintosh HD is still the same.

When I open the SystemProfiler of OS X it says that for both SATA drives I got in my G5 (a WesternDigital 200 GB with Mac OS X and a 160 GB Seagate disk with additional data) the SMART status is checked (in German it says "?berpr?ft"). So it should be normal...

Ulf
________
medical marijuana states (http://mmjp.org)

dnanian
08-06-2005, 05:46 PM
Well, Ulf, as I've said elsewhere, we've never seen a case where SuperDuper! didn't copy a file it was supposed to copy. So I don't think something "bad" happened here.

Rather, I'd guess that one of the files that's being deliberately ignored is quite large. Unusually so. I can't verify that from here, but you can check for yourself by examining the copy script you're using. Every file that's being treated specially is there, and you can see if any are large on your machine.

One distinct possibility: a folder in /Volumes that has data in it, even when no drive is attached...

uelef
08-06-2005, 06:08 PM
I'll check your suggestions tomorrow - it's time to go to bed in Germany.

I also checked your idea regarding the slow startup time on my G5 and downloaded the iDefrag demo - but my G5 isn't that much fragmented. I got similar values on my PowerBook G4 (1,67 GHz) that starts up much faster - although it should not be as fast as my G5 dual 2.5 GHz. On both are quite the same applications - the G5 only got a lot more of data on its disks.

Thanks for suggestions, Ulf
________
vapolution vaporizer (http://www.vaporshop.com/vapolution-vaporizer.html)

dnanian
08-06-2005, 06:14 PM
Hm. Well, it's also possible that waiting for drives to spin up can make hitting the desktop slower. But that wouldn't explain slower boot.

This might just be "one of those things", Ulf. If stuff is working well, and you're not noticing slowness in general, I'd probably just live with the few extra seconds on boot...

uelef
08-06-2005, 06:34 PM
Well, I guess I really have to live with that problem... Apps do not show any slowness. I work e.g. with Logic 7.1 that needs a lot of CPU power and everything is ok.

I'm asking myself if maybe my Western Digital Harddisk is not ok. The boot time problem exists since I installed Tiger - and this was the first time I used this disk as boot disk. On Panther I used the original Seagate drive that now is my second HD.
Problems with the Western Digital HD could also explain why the startup time from a firewire clone is faster. But how can I check my suggestion? Checking my disk with the Mac OS X Disk Utility (I don't know how it's named in English) I got no error - also when I use the Hardware Diagnosis CD that was delivered with my G5.

I'm a bit annoyed: I own one of the fastest G5 and spent a lot of money for it - and the startup time is much slower than on my PowerBook.

Ulf
________
Mercedes-Benz W126 specifications (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W126)

dnanian
08-06-2005, 06:43 PM
I understand your frustration, but fortunately there's a lot more to your machine than just startup performance!

uelef
08-06-2005, 06:49 PM
You're right, Dave. But now it's really time to go to bed. Thanks for your fast and many answers! I'll get some more testing regarding the HD size tomorrow.

Ulf
________
trichomes (http://trichomes.org)

davecc
08-06-2005, 07:12 PM
uelef,

My experiences with the Western Digital HD are bad as it crashed on my brand new 1 month G5 2.7 hence the reason I got SuperDuper. I replaced it with two 300GB Maxtor DiamondMax 10 7200RPM SATA II HD drives and have found a significant boost in boot times and general performances. My advice to you is to remove the WD HD as it has a hight failure rate on the G5 range.
David
Check this link:
http://discussions.info.apple.com/webx?128@879.YDQbaBMg3t5.8@.68aefb20

dnanian
08-06-2005, 07:51 PM
Along these lines, I'd actually suggest the Max Line III, rather than the Diamond Max drives. They're rated to have a 24-hour duty cycle...

Many swear by the Seagate drives, too.

uelef
08-07-2005, 05:51 AM
Good morning - here I am again...
The reason why I bought the Western Digital drive was that it was one of the fastest and one of the quietest. The internal Seagate drive that was delivered with G5 is much louder when it reads and writes data. I don't like noisy HDs.

I will make a little backup session today to see what's going on with the startup time. I will backup my Seagate drive data to an external FW drive then clone my Western Digital boot drive to the Seagate drive and have a look what happens to the startup time using another internal HD for booting Mac OS X.

Regarding the amount of data on my Macintosh HD and my FW clone: I found on my Macintosh HD on the hidden Volumes folder a folder called "LaCie Sicherung" (means "backup") with a Applications folder in it that has about 23 GB. I guess this folder is responsible for the difference of data on both drives. This folder maybe is the rest of a unfinished backup.

Ulf
________
marijuana bubbler (http://bubblers.net/)

dnanian
08-07-2005, 08:44 AM
Did you use Deja Vu at some point?

uelef
08-07-2005, 10:00 AM
No, until now I did not know Deja Vu. But what I used was CarbonCopyCloner - but it did not work with 10.4 and 10.4.1 - now with 10.4.2 it works again. But cloning a drive with CCC takes a bit longer than with SuperDuper!

For what problem should Deja Vu maybe be responsible?

Ulf
________
FES125 Pantheon (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Honda_FES125_Pantheon)

dnanian
08-07-2005, 10:37 AM
Well: Deja Vu and CCC use psync to do scheduled backups. But, at least in the case of Deja Vu, certain versions of it did not check to see if the drive was mounted before actually starting the copy.

As such, they'd copy to the mount point, in /Volumes, and if the drive wasn't there, the contents of the backup would be copied into a folder rather than to the drive (since both basically look the same).

This can also happen when a drive fails -- drops off the bus -- during a backup operation. The OS might not indicate a problem has occurred quickly enough, and then the mount point which -- again -- looks like a folder, would get created like any other.

The end result is the same, regardless: your data ends up in a folder in /Volumes, rather than on the actual drive you thought it was being copied to.

I hope that helps to explain...

uelef
08-07-2005, 12:45 PM
Dave, thanks for your explanations. Does SuperDuper! not use psync?

I today made my announced backup session - and now my Tiger boot disk is back on the Seagate drive. And really the startup time now is much shorter. It really had to do with the Western Digital harddisk. Strange! All hardware tests say it is ok but it's slowing down my login time.
Could there be something wrong with the jumpers? I guess I cannot exchange the drive on warranty because there's not really something wrong. But on the other side I do not want to use a HD that causes these problems...

You wrote about the Maxtor Max Line III. No doubt, they are fast, but are they also quiet? I don't want the HD to be the loudest component in my G5... I hate these loud r/w noises of HDs (I own a LaCie FW drive that is that noisy - for someone who's making music with his G5, noisy HDs are not acceptable!).

Ulf
________
500E (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_500E)

dnanian
08-07-2005, 12:55 PM
We do not use psync: our cloner is custom built, from the ground up, for speed and accuracy. Try benchmarking it against psync. :)

SATA drives don't really have jumpers, as far as I know... so I don't think it's jumpers. I just think it's a slow drive.

I think the MaxLine III is (very) quiet, but you'd have to check it yourself to be sure. I've also heard the most recent Seagates are much quieter than the older ones, too.

uelef
08-07-2005, 03:05 PM
Well, I can confirm that SuperDuper! works faster than CarbonCopyCloner - although I did not benchmark it.

When I use Xbench that also checks disk speed I cannot see any difference between my both internal drives: the Western Digital and the Seagate. That's why I cannot explain that booting with the WD drive takes so much longer than with the Seagate drive. There must something wrong with the WD drive - but I don't know what.
________
Enzo Ferrari (car) history (http://www.ferrari-wiki.com/wiki/Enzo_Ferrari_(car))

dnanian
08-07-2005, 07:48 PM
Well, XBench clearly isn't giving you the real-world benchmark you're seeing on your own machine! :) Another reason benchmarks aren't always that useful... ;)