Time machine keeps creating a new backup

[sphardy]

First, the question was HOW did you mount the share, not DID you mount the share (which you have to do to access the sparse bundles)

Second - you are still making the same error in your command:

Code: Select all

chflags -R nouchg /Volumes//ReadyNAS/Fred Smith office’s iMac.sparsebundle

Should be:

Code: Select all

chflags -R nouchg /Volumes/ReadyNAS/Fred\ Smith\ office\’s\ iMac.sparsebundle

[boomish]

chflags -R nouchg Fred\ Smith\ office\’s\ iMac.sparsebundle

Did you ever try this?

I didn't know this one no but I tried it and it came up with no such file or directory..

First, the question was HOW did you mount the share, not DID you mount the share (which you have to do to access the sparse bundles)

Second - you are still making the same error in your command:

Code: Select all

chflags -R nouchg /Volumes//ReadyNAS/Fred Smith office’s iMac.sparsebundle

Should be:

Code: Select all

chflags -R nouchg /Volumes/ReadyNAS/Fred\ Smith\ office\’s\ iMac.sparsebundle

Sorry I didn't read the mount question properly I did mount it via the go command, but I have restarted and tried the same commands. I have the normal mounted shares of a default Readynas, i.e. it shows afp and cifs as shared computers.
yes I tried both the second just results in there terminal box doing nothing no prompt or anything, I am leaving it running in case it's working in the background but looking in activity monitor it shows nothing really intensive going on.

Thanks for all the effort Sphardy, I don't blame you if you give up on me..I ma pretty good with computers honest, but this really has got me..

[sphardy]

PM sent

[boomish]

Sphardy, many many thanks for your diligence it finally worked!! it was as I noted earlier when I tried the backslash spaces you posted and left it running, when I returned terminal was showing a prompt again, so I then tried the next step
hdiutil attach -nomount -noverify -noautofsck /Volumes/ReadyNAS/Fred\ Smith\ office\’s\ iMac.sparsebundle
and got this!
/dev/disk2 Apple_partition_scheme
/dev/disk2s1 Apple_partition_map
/dev/disk2s2 Apple_HFSX

I am now rolling the rest of the instructions as fsck is running and repairing the sparse bundle. still long way to go and lots more weird Linux greek commands but at least I can access it!!
It may well have been working before I just couldn't tell, Terminal just sits there with no prompt. so if anyone else is following the same fix wait till the prompt retunes after the first volume check.

Thanks as well for the PM really really kind of you.

[boomish]

Well what a shame but it looks like my fix for my Time Machine backup was short lived, after a few days yet again this morning I got the error that Time machine couldn't verify the backup and I should start another

I am running the same fix as before detailed here http://www.garth.org/archives/2011,08,27,169,169.html
and I see the same error has occurred..

Incorrect number of file hard links
** Checking catalog hierarchy.
** Checking extended attributes file."

The repair is still running so I shall try it again but feel something else is happening to the file.

So to me I can't see how ReadyNas work with Lion, are others working OK?

[sphardy]

ReadyNAS works with Lion, but the issue appears to be with disk images created prior to Lion.

Your only recourse is to backup the sparsebundle, allow Lion/ReadyNAS to create a new one and then restore your data from the old to the new sparsebundle.

[boomish]

ahh I see,well if thats the case I'll delete them and start new ones, which is what I thought it was doing with this error anyway, can I just delete the image by mounting the Readynas?
I have down the repair again and it's working again, but for how long..

[sphardy]

Quickest to delete from the SSH shell - finder is very slow when it comes to deleting large sparsebundles (lots of small files which finder doesn't handle well)

[JustKJ]

I am having the same issue with Time Machine wanting to create new backups after a verification. I have no problem allowing it to create a new backup--I am loosing historical data yes, versioning yes, but I am OK with that as most of what I want backed up is the current state of files.

I want to know if anyone has figures out the root cause. This appeared to be happening after both an update to the ReadyNAS software and the installation of OSX 10.7.3. My wife's Mac Air is still on snow leopard and has never seen this error. As an added note, she is solely on Wifi. I had once read that it had something to do with Wifi and my iMac is physically connected to my gigabit network and to WiFi.

Anyway, has anyone heard of the cause. I would like to fix it and avoid the recreation of the backup every 8 or 9 days.

[Fandu]

Having the same problem. I'm hardly able to complete a new time machine backup (800GB) before the error pops up again. I've manually deleted the old snow leopard sparsebundle and created a new one from Lion, so it's not an issue of compatibility between SL and Lion.

Help Please.

[Trial_Master]

I'm in the same boat. Deleted old bundle files via SSH after I kept getting requests for new backup. This has made no difference and I'm basically not using TM now cause I'm getting no more than a week before new backup request.

[mdgm]

Have you opened tech support cases?

Also have you tried 4.2.20 beta to see if this makes any difference?: http://www.readynas.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=57193

4.2.20 beta looks like it's probably nearly a production release so even if not willing to try the beta do keep an eye out for it and try it once it comes out of beta.

[Trial_Master]

I must admit I haven't opened a support ticket but I will do so shortly. Thanks for heads up on beta, if it's near completion I may hold off I don't know enough about Linux to get myself out of trouble if beta caused me issues. Cheers...

[dfritschy]

I can confirm that this happens with Snow Leopard 10.6.8 too, ever since I updated to RAIDiator Sparc (for ReadyNAS Duo/NV+) 4.1.8.

As the system worked flawlessly before that update I have now restored Firmware Version 4.1.7 - may be not the option one usually wants to go for, but I hope it solves the problem.

And of course, I hope that Netgear takes these reports seriousely and comes up with a solution.

[lieverse]

I too had this happening. After following the instructions to fix this, the problem re-occurred only few days later.
I then recalled that I did have something similar in the past. As far as I can tell, it then it was due to the sparsebundle advertising some room left, whereas the timemachine share was already completely filled up. This confused TImeMachine, as it thought it had sufficient room to create a new backup in the sparsebundle, but then halfway got a write error. Note that I don't have hard evidence of this; I couldn't find specific log messages that point to this.

So after the 2nd occurence of this, after fixing the image again, I resized the sparsebundle using "hdiutil resize" to the smallest size possible. That shaved off a few GB. I was afraid that TM would just increase the size again at first backup (there was lot of discussion on this "feature" when it first occured somewhere in 10.6.8 or so), but fortunately the size sticked:

Code: Select all

14/4/12 1:45:17.307 PM com.apple.backupd: Resizing backup disk image from 441.0 GB to 449.9 GB
14/4/12 1:45:17.333 PM com.apple.backupd: Could not resize backup disk image (DIHLResizeImage returned 35)


So you can see TM is trying to resize the sparsebundle again (the actual TM share is 450 GB), but fails for some reason (it does this resize attempt each and every backup).
The first backup after the resize TM then had to remove some old backups (as it didn't have any room left for the new backup), but after that TM has been backing up hapily again for about 2 weeks now.

So maybe something has changed in the way actual share size is reported/handled in one of the RAIDiator updates (I'm on a NV+, 4.1.8 ), resulting in timemachine sparsebundles created on an older version now to be slightly too large (as TM has grown them to fit just within the share's size). I didn't check, but I guess that TM only tries to grow the sparsebundle when it detects the size is smaller than the share size, but doesn't do the reverse (shrinking when it detects the sparsebundle size is larger than the share size).

Paul