Niels Kobschaetzki [EMAIL PROTECTED] sez:
On Oct 31, 2007 5:03 PM, Steve Kalkwarf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before things get too far out of control, I want to clarify some
facts about how Time Machine and Yojimbo.
Yojimbo is built on CoreData, the same underlying technology as
Aperture, and
I was unaware of the restriction regarding Yojimbo and Time Machine.
Fortunately I haven't upgraded to Leopard yet (but had planned to do
so now that the 10.5.2 update is out and in fact have the Leopard box
sitting on my shelf). Time Machine was one of the driving reasons for
me to upgrade to
Curious, why is this bad?
1. Backup...the entire DB file (mine is hundreds of MB) needs to be
backed up. I backup everyday, both to external drive and offsite.
That means the large Yojimbo file needs to be backed up every day,
taking up unnecessary bandwidth and disk space.
2. Data
On Feb 14, 2008, at 4:09 PM, Rhet Turnbull wrote:
I hope that BareBones and/or Apple gets
this fixed soon. Requiring the user to have two separate backup plans
is unacceptable.
For me it hasn't been that big of a deal.
1) I excluded my Yojimbo DB from my time machine backups
2) I set up a
On 2/14/08, Rhet Turnbull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Curious, why is this bad?
1. Backup...the entire DB file (mine is hundreds of MB) needs to be
backed up. I backup everyday, both to external drive and offsite.
That means the large Yojimbo file needs to be backed up every day,
taking up
TjL [EMAIL PROTECTED] sez:
It also, I would assume, is why .Mac fails to sync Yojimbo so often.
Instead of syncing 1,000 small files, it is trying to sync one
monolithic DB. [...]
That's not the case; although .Mac must ultimately contain your whole data
set before syncing between machines can
On 2/14/08, Patrick Woolsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TjL [EMAIL PROTECTED] sez:
It also, I would assume, is why .Mac fails to sync Yojimbo so often.
Instead of syncing 1,000 small files, it is trying to sync one
monolithic DB. [...]
That's not the case; although .Mac must ultimately
