Does the competition have an influence on Apple Logic pro updates?

I was not aware that tm was even using APFS at all, but maybe it is now?

 

Not according to Apple. It can backup an APFS drive, but the TM drive still has to be HFS+

 

https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/types-of-disks-you-can-use-with-time-machine-mh15139/mac

The Tm drive is not where local snapshots are stored and never has been. Localsnapshots are stored under the covers when your TM drive is not accessible for some reason. It’s a precautionary thing.

 

Before high Sierra they were stored in some secret tricky way.

 

The question remains whether these local TM snapshots are now stored using the old secret tricky way or now using APFS snapshots when the local volume is APFS. Secondary to that question is whether these snapshots are using up user accessible space on the volume or if these secret snapshots automatically get overwritten by any relevant user activity as was the case at least before high sierra

The question remains whether these local TM snapshots are now stored using the old secret tricky way or now using APFS snapshots when the local volume is APFS.

 

Apparently they're APFS snapshots:

 

https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/344681/macos-mojave-local-snapshots

Maybe. There are confusing posts all over the internet about it and I’m not 100% convinced until I see something more official to confirm that. I have no problem if they are, they would be more efficient that way but then we need to make sure they are not using user accessible disk space over time

They're definitely using user accessible disk space - or at least are now being reported as used disk space to the finder, since the available free space is directly tied to the snapshot usage. IE - I can delete a bunch of them and watch the free space on the disk rise. I've never gotten to the point of little enough free space to find out if they get overwritten as needed, but I have seen people reporting free space dropping into the single GB range.

Let me try to explain things better.

 

Prior to High Sierra:

 

1. TimeMachine could connect to a TM device with HFS+ and make backups
   
2. When the backup device is not available, TimeMachine would make so called "local snapshots", which are basically some tm backups saved in secret hidden place on the boot drive until such time the main backup device comes back online.
   
3. The secret/hidden local snapshots were not visible to the user, and even the space they occupied was not reported to the user in finder.
   
4. tmutil, however, could see those snapshots, see the space they are taking, allow the user to manually delete them, etc..
   
5. If finder was reporting 100GB of free space, even though tmutil was reporting that 50gb was used by the local snapshots, then the user would have 100GB of space available for their work, just as if the local snapshots didn't even exist. They were hidden for a reason, they were disposable and entirely managed by the OS.

 

Now when that above first came out, a lot of people freaked out and said "WTF is this stuff taking up space on my hard drive according to tmutil!??!". But the truth is they didn't need to worry about it, the space they were taking, was not using up ANY available space for the user's actual use, as indicated by the Finder not reporting that space used nor would any other apps see it used and the user was completely free to write to that full amount of space and OSX would erase the underlying local snapshots as needed. So people were freaking out about nothing and the truth is, nobody needed to manually manage them in tmutil.

 

Now along comes APFS.. It has snapshot feature at the volume level. its possible, but not confirmed, that TM would use APFS snapshots to actually store the TM "local snapshots". However if it behaves exactly as the old one did, then it should not be any concern because the Finder should continue to show all of that space as available to the user with no impact, the OS will automatically erase those local snapshots on the fly as needed. Its handled entirely by the oS, there should be no need to run tmutil, etc. However, I would like to hear actual confirmation on both points...whether its using APFS for the TM snapshots or not...which is not for sure in my view...and whether they are now somehow creeping up the disk space usage on the drive in a way that will negatively effect users unless they manually delete snapshots using tmutil.

From what I've read (eg https://derflounder.wordpress.com/2019/02/23/mounting-time-machine-local-snapshots-as-read-only-volumes/) the local snapshots in HS are apfs (assuming the drive is apfs). The snapshots do register as used space on the drive. What I don't know, since I've never gotten that far, is whether the snapshots will actually be automatically deleted when a critical threshold is reached. From the docs I've read its something along the lines of 20% or 5GB free space. I do know that contrary to the docs, the local snapshots are stored for longer than the advertised 24 hour period.

good article, thanks for posting that.

 

Still need to find out more about how OSX is managing those.

 

I am using TImeMachineEditor anyway, which theoretically should avoid creating those local snapshots to begin with. I schedule mine to only run TM at night and not to make hourly local snapshots..but that doesn't mean TM might not do it anyway. I'll check that out later and find out, I just set it up this morning.

 

But I would like to find out more whether OSX is cleaning up those automatically. I would think so. They are a very efficient way of making snapshots though, so I can see why they are using it as a method. I think probably when you run a normal TM backup its supposed to go back and delete the local snapshots too..

Here's a good article about it.

 

https://www.imore.com/how-us-time-machine-local-snapshots-recover-data-your-mac-laptop

 

Personally I think this is a pretty good feature. It means that if I need to restore a file from an hour ago, then it will be very very fast compared to trying to get it from the TM device (which in my case is over the network). I think in most normal cases, it should not grow too big..because I believe that every time you make a TM back-up to your device it should drop the snapshot back to just one snapshot or something.. I am experimenting with that now.

 

But I can see where it could suck up some space on an hour-by hour basis if you have any large files that change frequently. For example, our Mail content is usually a few GB and always changing so basically every hour, TM will save another couple GB's just because of that alone. Its bad enough when it goes to a TM device, but if it goes into a local snapshot, than it could grow to rather large if a normal TM backup doesn't come along to prune it out.

 

I have TM exclusions on a few large files like that to avoid my TM backup from getting too big unnecessarily. That will help me with the snapshots. I normally do my backups only at night and don't get hourly TM backups, and by the way, that utility I mentioned, TimeMachineEditor, DOES disable the hourly local snapshots if you uncheck that box (see my post earlier). but actually I think I will turn it back on now that I understand things better.

 

by the way, this whole feature BLOWS AWAY anything provided by MS Windows 10!

also the APFS snapshot feature in general could be used for some us to do some interesting things, though it does seem like there could be more GUI support related to APFS snapshots.

I just discovered the Carbon Copy Cloner has some pretty neat support for the APFS snapshots. You can go in there, see a list of snapshots, how much space each one is taking up, you can easily browse the contents of each snapshot too and delete any you want.

 

CCC also seems to have some configurable retention policies and frankly I am thinking about using CCC instead of TimeMachine from now on. With the APFS snapshot integration it comes really close to offering TM like functionality, not quite as pretty to look at, but you can restore single files from a snapshot easily and all the rest, but with better and more configurable retention policies to avoid the snapshot disk usage from getting out of hand.

Cheers for the CCC info. That's very interesting!

i have never used time machine, and have been using CCC for years. but... i only mirror my macs, so files i don't save don't stay on the backup. not for everyone perhaps, but makes sense to me. and recently, i needed to make a bootable backup; worked perfectly. it's a great app, with lots of options.

I backup with both TM and CCC right now. I use TM for getting versioned backups of files in case I delete something by accident or something gets corrupted, this file or that. CCC is, as you said, a bootable and complete backup. I don't really trust TM for that.

 

The beauty of this new Snapshot integration in CCC is that you can have the best of both worlds, a bootable backup as well as the ability to quickly and easily get to snapshots from the past week or two of any changes you made.

i have never used time machine, and have been using CCC for years. but... i only mirror my macs, so files i don't save don't stay on the backup. not for everyone perhaps, but makes sense to me. and recently, i needed to make a bootable backup; worked perfectly. it's a great app, with lots of options.

Yeah mirroring is fine for disaster recovery, but if you're using your machine in a professional capacity (by that i mean somewhat pressured by external influences such as customers/projects/targets), it's really important to be able to get files back from the past hours and perform more frequent incremental based backups. I run 3 local backup sets based on the priority of work i'm doing to ensure that the top priority stuff is always being cycled and backed up incrementally. Usually, in my case, it's a customer that has decided to u-turn so have to react within minutes.

 

And as above, yes, the temp files really do build up, as do cache, and apps like Spotify should be shot as they never seem to behave to the settings, i have calendar reminders to run Disk Inventory X and check my drive capacity as that's the best way to notice any build ups before it causes you problems.

i have never used time machine, and have been using CCC for years. but... i only mirror my macs, so files i don't save don't stay on the backup. not for everyone perhaps, but makes sense to me. and recently, i needed to make a bootable backup; worked perfectly. it's a great app, with lots of options.

Yeah mirroring is fine for disaster recovery, but if you're using your machine in a professional capacity (by that i mean somewhat pressured by external influences such as customers/projects/targets), it's really important to be able to get files back from the past hours and perform more frequent incremental based backups. I run 3 local backup sets based on the priority of work i'm doing to ensure that the top priority stuff is always being cycled and backed up incrementally. Usually, in my case, it's a customer that has decided to u-turn so have to react within minutes.

 

And as above, yes, the temp files really do build up, as do cache, and apps like Spotify should be shot as they never seem to behave to the settings, i have calendar reminders to run Disk Inventory X and check my drive capacity as that's the best way to notice any build ups before it causes you problems.

 

 

ha, "professional capacity". i archive (AND backup) projects, and backup in general after every session. i have never lost anything, nor been unable to access needed files. and my clients and collabs appreciate this. the benefit (for me) is not having drives littered with unneeded files, endless versions of projects etc.

 

this works for me because i am (terrifyingly) organized. really, whatever works, as long as we back up.

It's not about 'losing' anything - that is what Disaster recovery is and what you're doing, which is a simple catch all that works.

 

In a professional environment (Particularly when dealing with moving targets) you can't rely on end of day backups and manually copying to archives - because too much data is manipulated in a working day for that to be viable and hella dangerous to rely on.

 

An example is submitting projects for a 11.30am deadline based on a call you had at 9am, and you're immediately asked to reverse it at 12pm. You can then be asked later in the day to re-instate the 11.30am changes at 3pm as they've passed review on a secondary validation. At any point in time i need to be able to get there, and quick.

 

*Your* fine as you work in a somewhat more isolated workflow, but as you can see, it's quite 'normal' for temp files to build up in an active working environment like this, as discussed by others.

Edited May 22, 2019 by skijumptoes

I'm with skijumptoes here, but everyone has their own way of working and nothing wrong with that. The main reason I like having versioned backups is because it could be 3 days later or 5 or 10 and suddenly I realize some file got removed or corrupted 6 days ago...and last nights backup doesn't have it either. More than once TimeMachine has come in handy for that.

It's not about 'losing' anything - that is what Disaster recovery is and what you're doing, which is a simple catch all that works.

 

In a professional environment (Particularly when dealing with moving targets) you can't rely on end of day backups and manually copying to archives - because too much data is manipulated in a working day for that to be viable and hella dangerous to rely on.

 

An example is submitting projects for a 11.30am deadline based on a call you had at 9am, and you're immediately asked to reverse it at 12pm. You can then be asked later in the day to re-instate the 11.30am changes at 3pm as they've passed review on a secondary validation. At any point in time i need to be able to get there, and quick.

 

*Your* fine as you work in a somewhat more isolated workflow, but as you can see, it's quite 'normal' for temp files to build up in an active working environment like this, as discussed by others.

 

ok, i'll let my collabs & clients know that i am not, in fact, working in a 'professional' environment. thanks for clearing that up!

 

EDIT: i keep files until i don't need them, but also check out the 'revert to' menu in logic; have used that only a few times, but invaluable then...

ok, i'll let my collabs & clients know that i am not, in fact, working in a 'professional' environment. thanks for clearing that up!

If you're going to pick up on such a trivial point personal to yourself then I'd call you immature rather than unprofessional, but tell them whatever you please!

 

Love you really, man. :)

also want to point out, that the local snapshots created by TM appear to get automatically deleted after 24 hours.

ok, i'll let my collabs & clients know that i am not, in fact, working in a 'professional' environment. thanks for clearing that up!

If you're going to pick up on such a trivial point personal to yourself then I'd call you immature rather than unprofessional, but tell them whatever you please!

 

Love you really, man. :)

 

if you're making trivial points (and i appreciate your admitting that) in direct response to what i've written... that does seem pretty personal. but no stress! am probably a bit of both (immature and unprofessional).

 

love u back!

I think the problem with TM is when you're on the move and not near your main backup drive for a considerable period - then they start to build up (obviously). Not sure how it is with Mojave etc. though as the only machine of mine that gets TM'd is on Sierra.

 

Must admit, wasn't a fan of it to start with but cloud solutions like Crashplan have been a godsend for me past few years - just truly excellent.

I think the problem with TM is when you're on the move and not near your main backup drive for a considerable period - then they start to build up (obviously). Not sure how it is with Mojave etc. though as the only machine of mine that gets TM'd is on Sierra.

 

Must admit, wasn't a fan of it to start with but cloud solutions like Crashplan have been a godsend for me past few years - just truly excellent.

 

agreed; i've been using crashplan (since about 2012); saved me a few times when travelling... good to have an online backup and a close-by backup.

If you're looking for something relatively capacious and free, try FileShadow.com. 100GB. How long it will stay that way, I don't know.

After 12 years of Logic, Cubase Pro is a bit clunky and unintuitive, I find. I wouldn't have gone for it had it not been 50% off. I also don't like the obviously 'ported from Windows' look, but I suppose I will adapt. It seems to have most of the features I am familiar with in Logic (though my knowledge is not comprehensive after 10 days). Comping is not as elegant, that's for sure. Anyway, I am future-proof now in the event I move to Windows, which I would seriously hope doesn't happen.

After 12 years of Logic, Cubase Pro is a bit clunky and unintuitive, I find. I wouldn't have gone for it had it not been 50% off. I also don't like the obviously 'ported from Windows' look, but I suppose I will adapt. It seems to have most of the features I am familiar with in Logic (though my knowledge is not comprehensive after 10 days). Comping is not as elegant, that's for sure. Anyway, I am future-proof now in the event I move to Windows, which I would seriously hope doesn't happen.

 

I could have written this same post in the near past: workflow, appearance, features, and future-proofing.

 

Even though Cubase now has a consolidated window, it still works better with a multi-monitor setup. The consolidated window works well on a single large monitor but I removed Cubase from my MBP.

 

You can do everything you need to do in Cubase and I would argue that after establishing initial familiarity, it's score editor may have an edge on Logic's score editor.

Cubase vs. Logic is really a flip of the coin based on preference. The obvious advantage of Cubase is being a cross platform app, and that may also be a disadvantage in terms of performance on Mac.

 

I'm still not totally ruling out getting a budget PC for Cubase but I simply prefer Logic but like many, dislike Apple's pricing. Having said that, I do think the pricing of the 2018 i7 Mini is reasonable, and it's on my wish list for later this year.

While i find the interface slower than Logic (few extra clicks and pauses), i find that i'm more productive in Cubase. A big issue i've always had with Logic is the routing of MIDI ports on a track by track basis - using external gear i can fly on Cubase and easily route any controller keyboard to any module/synth/sampler and monitor off/on as i choose.

 

From a songwriting perspective i do prefer it, it seems easier to record on the fly and punch in/out (No demixing for example), and the control room is fantastic for different monitors/phones. I also really like how when you select an input, it gets added to the main mixer view, that's really handy being so clear on the screen.

 

How it deals with overlapping regions is nice too, i definitely find that less cumbersome, and simple things i like - i.e. how it puts FX receives into folders, being able to setup arrangements and use the arrangement editor to try different ideas.

 

I can see me tripping up like crazy on mixing however, as the main mixing console seems like Optimus Prime in that it unfolds and has all sorts hidden away from view. Is that where people find it slower? Also the channel strip EQ i really miss Logics, Cubase doesn't seem to low cut the same which is throwing me out!

 

The included sounds are much more fresher than Logics which is good for inspiration too. But browsing them - man, Logics library is far quicker and better implemented.

How long have you been using Cubase?