Time Machine Backup over NAS

[yufee]

Hi everyone,

Recently i bought a WD My Cloud Home 4TB Personal Cloud thinking it will work easily as TM backup with my iMac 3Tb and also to replace my Austor NAS. The reason for this potential switch was because i have been experiencing frequent `corrupt’ TM backups every now and then on the Asustor and was hoping to find a reliable TM backup over NAS. In the past i was using Synology DS212 but i was told Asustor is `better’.

Question: Can I asked from your experience, what is a reliable TM backups over NAS? Would Synology DS220J be a good reliable solution?

Thanks!

 

[PetPet]

AFAIK All TM over WiFi is prone to get corrupted.
I’ll recommend you either do it via USB or Ethernet.

 

[yufee]

Thanks! But both my iMac and the NAS are connected directly to the LAN. Thus I am puzzled why is this happening? I also read or issues that other users encounter online so I was wondering if anyone has been successful closer home.

 

[szeli]

It seems like e newer OSes like Mojave, Catalina need to backup to targets that recognize APFS. this is purely my experience: my Mojave/Catalina Macs could only backup over e network to my backup server after I updated it to High Sierra. it wud always get corrupted previously.

 

[lumpyme]

I used to have a Synology has connected for time machine backups, the issue is that Synology does not delete previous backups so eventually your time machine will start to take ridiculous amounts of space
I googled for a solution last year and it seems like Synology nas is not a official solution so they have no relationship with apple. How it connects is via Synology engineers doing their best to reverse engineer apple time machine so it will never be fully compatible

 

[reddevil0728]

I used to have a Synology has connected for time machine backups, the issue is that Synology does not delete previous backups so eventually your time machine will start to take ridiculous amounts of space
I googled for a solution last year and it seems like Synology nas is not a official solution so they have no relationship with apple. How it connects is via Synology engineers doing their best to reverse engineer apple time machine so it will never be fully compatible

hmmm it does what. older backup of TM will be overwritten just like any other drive no??

 

[PetPet]

Thanks! But both my iMac and the NAS are connected directly to the LAN. Thus I am puzzled why is this happening? I also read or issues that other users encounter online so I was wondering if anyone has been successful closer home.

Yep. I faced the same issue previously when I connected to wifi on my MacBook. I had it working with TM on my NAS, provided I completely avoided using the WiFi on my home network by disconnecting from wifi whenever my MacBook was on my home network.

I found it too troublesome and eventually explored other solutions such as Arq/Backblaze/Tarsnap

 

[xiaofan]

Yep. I faced the same issue previously when I connected to wifi on my MacBook. I had it working with TM on my NAS, provided I completely avoided using the WiFi on my home network by disconnecting from wifi whenever my MacBook was on my home network.

I found it too troublesome and eventually explored other solutions such as Arq/Backblaze/Tarsnap

Just wondering what is the solution you are using now? Arq, Tarsnap or Backblaze?

I intend to use Time Machine plus FreeFileSync to external USB HDD and also a personal NAS (WD MyCloud 3TB, not the new MyCloud Home). But I am also exploring cloud backup option.

Triggering point is that Google will start to charge for Google Photos after June 2021 and I have lots of files there (about 500GB now on three Google accounts). I plan to pay for Google One 2TB option for the family. In that case, I can use online backup solution as well.

The other option is to use iCloud 200GB option for the non Photo files of the family Apple stuff (iPhones, iPads and one Mac Mini M1) and Google One for the Photos/Videos generated by the phones (Android phones and iPhones).

 

[ForbiddenB]

How is the performance of WD My Cloud Home? I’m looking to get this for both time machine and for 4K media streaming locally, is it fast enough? Because my past experience with Apple time capsule was bad, it’s way too slow to be used for media streaming

 

[xiaofan]

How is the performance of WD My Cloud Home? I’m looking to get this for both time machine and for 4K media streaming locally, is it fast enough? Because my past experience with Apple time capsule was bad, it’s way too slow to be used for media streaming

Do not buy it. The Software is not up to par. I actually use FreeFileSync and not the WD apps for file backup on my Windows laptop and Mac Mini. The mobile apps are even worse. So I have given up using it for mobile phone photo backup and use Google Photos instead.

MyCloud Home is said to be no better than the older MyCloud in terms of software and apps. Some even say it is worse.

Get a proper NAS if you are into streaming.

 

[ForbiddenB]

Do not buy it. The Software is not up to par. I actually use FreeFileSync and not the WD apps for file backup on my Windows laptop and Mac Mini. The mobile apps are even worse. So I have given up using it for mobile phone photo backup and use Google Photos instead.

MyCloud Home is said to be no better than the older MyCloud in terms of software and apps. Some even say it is worse.

Get a proper NAS if you are into streaming.

How about the wd my cloud ex2? Will that be any better?

 

[xiaofan]

How about the wd my cloud ex2? Will that be any better?

That would be better in terms of HW spec and the reliability due to 2 Bay.

But the software and apps are actually the same as my WD MyCloud (OS 3). The OS is pretty outdated.

Ref:
https://shop.westerndigital.com/en-...ud-expert-series-ex2-ultra#WDBVBZ0000NCH-SESN

Recently there is an upgrade to the OS (OS5) for some of the MyCloud devices, including the EX2. The feedback in WD Forum seems to be bad as well.
https://community.wd.com/c/OS5/252

If you are looking at the MyCloud EX2, then you have even better reason to look at Synology or Asustor.

 

[xiaofan]

How about the wd my cloud ex2? Will that be any better?

...
Recently there is an upgrade to the OS (OS5) for some of the MyCloud devices, including the EX2. The feedback in WD Forum seems to be bad as well.
https://community.wd.com/c/OS5/252

If you are looking at the MyCloud EX2, then you have even better reason to look at Synology or Asustor.

Timemachine will not work with WD MyCloud on Big Sur even with the OS 5 upgrade.
https://community.wd.com/t/timemachine-and-big-sur/258779/6

On the other hand, PLEX will still work with OS 5 upgrade.
https://community.wd.com/t/os5-vs-os3-it-does-less/257489/20

 

[xiaofan]

It seems to be a general problem for Time Machine to NAS on Big Sur because of the problem with AFP and SMB v3 protocol. Probably using a USB HDD is the way to go for TM. Or just give up using TM.

Apple forum discussion on using TM with Synology NAS. Still some people have success with Synology.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252044567

 

[melvinchen]

I used to have a Synology has connected for time machine backups, the issue is that Synology does not delete previous backups so eventually your time machine will start to take ridiculous amounts of space
I googled for a solution last year and it seems like Synology nas is not a official solution so they have no relationship with apple. How it connects is via Synology engineers doing their best to reverse engineer apple time machine so it will never be fully compatible

Did you set backup retention?

 

[TanKianW]

If you want true reliability. Try TrueNAS core, no longer named the FreeNAS. Only challenge is you need to DIY the NAS on your own.

I had a file pool on FreeNAS system which has been with me for the past 10+ years. Survived every power outage, HDD corruption, hardware component failures and the data is still intact.

With TrueNAS Core, you could set up your own cloud (Nextcloud), snapshots, auto sync using Syncthing, Time machine backups, VMs, etc. All in one package.

Synology uses brtfs which is a more inferior file system as compared to ZFS. I don't recommend for important and mission critical backups.

TrueNAS Core does has a learning curve, but after started using and trusting it. You will never look back at OTS NAS and backup system anymore. OTS NAS just pales in comparison.

 

[xiaofan]

Official Synology Time Machine Guide
It is possible to set the user quota to limit the size of Time Machine backup.

For Big Sur, SMB is preferred over AFP.
https://www.synology.com/en-us/know...es_from_Mac_to_Synology_NAS_with_Time_Machine

 

[xiaofan]

If you want true reliability. Try TrueNAS core, no longer named the FreeNAS. Only challenge is you need to DIY the NAS on your own.

I had a file pool on FreeNAS system which has been with me for the past 10+ years. Survived every power outage, HDD corruption, hardware component failures and the data is still intact.

With TrueNAS Core, you could set up your own cloud (Nextcloud), snapshots, auto sync using Syncthing, Time machine backups, VMs, etc. All in one package.

Synology uses brtfs which is a more inferior file system as compared to ZFS. I don't recommend for important and mission critical backups.

TrueNAS Core does has a learning curve, but after started using and trusting it. You will never look back at OTS NAS and backup system anymore. OTS NAS just pales in comparison.

Interesting Reddit discussion on TrueNAS Core with Time Machine under macOS 11 Big Sur. It does work well but one may need to limit the Time Machine schedule to reduce the number of snapshots.
https://www.reddit.com/r/truenas/co..._source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body

 

[TanKianW]

On the SMB share side, you can create shadow copies from the snapshots. Really useful.

It can also work like "Time Machine" on windows but backed with ZFS's bullet proof reliability.

 

[xiaofan]

Just tried a simple disk benchmark using AJA System Test Lite for my WD Mycloud 3TB (OS3). It could be WD's AFP implementation is really bad.
SMP V3: 78MB/sec read, 65MB/sec write
AFP: 34MB/sec read, 28MB/sec write

In this case, AFP is much worse. Anyway, Apple recommends to use SMB for NAS in Big Sur (no longer offer AFP in server format, but still available in client format).

Ref: high performance NAS benchmark using AFP, SMP and NFS, in macOS Mojave. AFP is only sliighly slower than SMB there.
https://photographylife.com/afp-vs-nfs-vs-smb-performance

BTW, benchmark from Linux side usually favors NFS.