 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6
07-19-2009, 05:46 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
How the "file pointer" moves is entirely up to the system, as you might expect. We copy the entire file with a single low-level call, and then supplement the metadata as appropriate (which can take a few). Subsequent Smart Updates will be faster...
__________________
--Dave Nanian 
|
| Tags |
| slow, superduper, time machine, timemachine |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Super Slow Time Machine After SuperDuper Restore | kipshaw | General | 5 | 07-12-2009 02:45 PM |
| Using SuperDuper for an offsite Time Machine backup | toy | General | 1 | 07-26-2008 12:02 PM |
| SuperDuper causing Time Machine to fail | jrdub | General | 2 | 02-26-2008 10:22 PM |
| Time Machine stopped working - SuperDuper involved? | adriansmith | General | 18 | 02-20-2008 03:48 PM |
| Will Time Machine make SuperDuper obsolete? | JAC II | General | 9 | 11-07-2007 03:54 PM |
Threaded Mode