NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Time Machine verification failure (again)
I know this has been discussed before but it seems like a perennial question. The problem occurred with my ReadyNAS Duo every few months and this is the second time it has happened with my RN102 ...
Hi - happened here too.
My Time Machine appears to think that something has changed with the disk when there's been a firmware update or a power loss.
If my theory is correct, that this occurs because the ReadyNAS won't allow Time Machine to delete old backups (as seems arithmetically likely), it would mean that this was more likely to happen after an OS update on a Mac because the first Time Machine backup will have to accommodate all the changes in the new OS. I've noticed incremental updates cause a 7+GB backup. I imagine a full OS update is going to be at least that size but often with it comes additional updates such as Safari 9.0.
So, a large backup is more likely to reach the sparsebundle limit than a small one simply due to the fact that a large backup takes a bigger step towards filling the available space. I wouldn't like to comment about the new ReadyNAS OS as I didn't know about it until I read your post.
I'll be taking mine back to the supplier this Thursday and I'm very curious about what they are going to say, especially given Netgear's head in the sand **bleep**-Kafkaesque approach to the problem. But I won't be leaving the shop without a solution.
I want to point out, especially to anybody who thinks that my last post was censored because I had used unacceptable language, that I had used a three letter word which has been in common English usage for over 400 years whose nuanced meaning approximates to 'combined with' and is present in academic notation and titles as well as UK place names. The word has been co-opted in the last thirty years or so (as a respelling of another word) to mean something entirely different - especially in, shall we say, certain circles of special interest; so one might wonder about the preoccupation behind the censorship.
okulo wrote:
I want to point out, especially to anybody who thinks that my last post was censored because I had used unacceptable language, that I had used a three letter word which has been in common English usage for over 400 years whose nuanced meaning approximates to 'combined with' and is present in academic notation and titles as well as UK place names. The word has been co-opted in the last thirty years or so (as a respelling of another word) to mean something entirely different - especially in, shall we say, certain circles of special interest; so one might wonder about the preoccupation behind the censorship.
I've only seen this version. FWIW, the editing history I see doesn't show anyone editing the post.
I had a private message saying that the post had 'been edited because it violates the Community Terms of Service, which prohibit Cussing or using of profanity', hence the ***bleep***.
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
