Time Machine + Aperture Bug

[MacRumors]

Aperture users that have upgraded to Mac OS 10.5 Leopard should beware when using Time Machine. According to an Apple support document, having Time Machine run a backup while an Aperture session is in progress could result in inconsistencies in the Aperture database.

Apple recommends that Aperture users set Time Machine to perform manual backups. Apple also says that they will be updating the support document as more information becomes available, perhaps indicating that they are working on a resolution to the issue.

Article Link: Time Machine + Aperture Bug

 

[adamfilip]

why do they have to push the OS out before its ready

I would much prefer 2 more weeks of bug killing then to have it 2 weeks early and struggle with the os being buggy

what makes this worse is thats its a problem between two apple products..

 

[TheSpecialist]

Not so clever Apple..........

 

[sachamun]

I keep getting this feeling too. I mean, all up it's a pretty good effort considering exactly how much work has to go into an OS, but I can't help but think that a little more foresight should have gone into compatibility. Maybe putting the betas into certain user's hands and not just developers who may only use them to test their own apps??

 

[joseph2166]

why do they have to push the OS out before its ready

I would much prefer 2 more weeks of bug killing then to have it 2 weeks early and struggle with the os being buggy

what makes this worse is thats its a problem between two apple products..

I agree the problem is pretty stupid considering its an apple product-product issue. However even if they delayed it two more weeks there would still be calls for it to have been delayed a further two weeks - they have to ship it sometime! Lets be glad apple make regular, useful updates to OSX.

 

[Doctor Q]

It's too bad that this glitch wasn't caught in time.

The support document does not make clear whether the "inconsistencies in the Aperture database" would be in the original copy or only in the backup copies. I assume that it's only in the backup copies. If that's the case, it seems to me that it would not be necessary to limit Time Machine to manual backups as long as you never use Time Machine to restore the Aperture database. More importantly, the distinction makes a big difference to users for whom 'inconsistencies" have already occurred.

 

[FocusAndEarnIt]

I have been patient with Leopard and understanding but this just pissed me the **** off. This is ********.

 

[ogee]

If that's the case, it seems to me that it would not be necessary to limit Time Machine to manual backups as long as you never use Time Machine to restore the Aperture database.

Not looked into TM much yet, but I assume you could exclude the Aperture DB from TM backups.

Anyone here able to knock up an automator script that switches backup off, starts Aperture then waits for Aperture to exit before re-enabling TM? (Ive never figured out Automator )

 

[l33r0y]

Come on Apple... How old is the issue of open files & databases while a backup is running....?

 

[rckstwrz]

has anyone actually had an issue occur because of this?

 

[Claypidgeon]

Hopefully there are some pretty specific conditions that have to exist for there to be a problem. I'm pretty sure I've already been using Aperture while a TM backup ran, so it'd be nice to know what the actual symptoms are. Hopefully there some way to check the consistency of the Aperture database.

It seems like the easier workaround for the moment is to turn off TM when you're going to use Aperture instead of making TM totally manual. I guess it's just a matter of remembering you need to do it.

 

[Claypidgeon]

has anyone actually had an issue occur because of this?

One thing I've noticed is Aperture no longer shows me how many items have not been stored in a vault yet on the splash screen. No idea if this is just a Leopard issue or related to this specific problem.

 

[swissmann]

Aperture 2.0

OK so who else thinks Apple just needs to do a major update with Aperture instead of these little bug fix ones? I've been waiting way too long on a 2.0 version. Fix this issue with it and give us all the new features. I was hoping that Leopard was needed for the cool stuff they had planned for the next revision like dependancy on core animation and that is why we were stuck at 1.5.whatever. Well leopard is here, bust out the Aperture update already.

 

[miketcool]

OK so who else thinks Apple just needs to do a major update with Aperture instead of these little bug fix ones? I've been waiting way too long on a 2.0 version. Fix this issue with it and give us all the new features. I was hoping that Leopard was needed for the cool stuff they had planned for the next revision like dependancy on core animation and that is why we were stuck at 1.5.whatever. Well leopard is here, bust out the Aperture update already.

I imagine an improved Vault is on the way because it seems conflicting to have a backup option in a program while Time Machine is running. Guess this is another reason to make my .Mac account obsolete. Apple really does need to release Aperture 2.0 and put an end to Backup; except where does that leave Tiger users? Not everyone can upgrade, without new hardware/ complete compatibility. I imagine after the rest of users can upgrade, like those of us using Adobe, we'll see Leopard ready pro software.

 

[twoodcc]

i'm sure that they are working on fixing this issue. i'm sure they'll have a solution out soon

 

[iJawn108]

ohhhh sad ;( ill be waiting even longer to upgrade

 

[Kendall015]

I have a feeling that the issue is really that time machine will backup the entire Aperture database every single time it backs up, thus chewing up free space on your backup drive. I could be wrong, though.

 

[dogtanian]

I've literally just bought Aperture for my new Leopard MBP so obviously disappointed (Was just as disappointed when I realised I wasn't going to be able to use Airdisk with TM). People have been talking a lot about Aperture 2.0 What's Apples usual action on upgrading their pro apps? IE how much would I have to pay if 2.0 was released in say Dec?

Wish they hadn't messed up this release quite so much...

 

[hob]

yeesh. i wonder who at Apple was testing, and what they were testing?!

I'll be installing Leopard on my PB only - the main iMac can wait till I work out what programs don't work with it... I still haven't worked out if Maya 8.5 will run with Leopard!

 

[bigandy]

Not looked into TM much yet, but I assume you could exclude the Aperture DB from TM backups.

You can, and I have

Simple. I've got the vault and one other backup anyway, so I'm not bothered.

 

[PNorth]

Problem existed before Leopard...

The problem of Aperture "detecting" inconsistencies in your library is something that happened BEFORE I upgraded to Leopard.

Many other Aperture users have experienced this as well, as you can see here:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=976099&tstart=0

Personally, prior to experiencing this, Aperture has been a really fantastic application for me. I can't wait for version 2.0.

I've had Aperture running while Time Machine has been doing what it does in the background, and haven't had a problem... so far. That said, I'm simply not going to connect my Time Machine external drive to my MBP while I'm running Aperture. All my masters are referrenced on an external drive anyway.

Basically, when Aperture tells you it has detected some inconsistencies in your Aperture Library, it will tell you to hold down Command + Option next time you restart. If you choose "Rebuild Now", all your projects will be gone until Aperture recovers them. If this "just announced" issue causes a similar problem, Aperture hangs and you have to Force Quit it.

I really hope they resolve this issue ASAFP, because it just makes Aperture an unreliable solution.

 

[Analog Kid]

Not good. Time Machine was supposed to protect me from lost data, but now it sounds like it's actively losing data.

Big question is this-- what is it about Aperture that triggers this? Are other applications vulnerable?

 

[mullet]

Does this affect your Aperture library if it is stored elsewhere? My Aperture library is stored on an external disk. Logically if you have chosen not to backup that disk then the library would remain untouched. I hop this is the case.

Regards,
Mullet

 

[ATMB]

this happens because Apple is driven by its Marketing dept. And for an engineers team like the one on Leopard, this is _really_ the worst thing that could happen.

Leopard is no more Leopard. Is a little, tiny, tenderly cat.

 

[adamzx3]

I think apple should split up between Apple fun and Apple Pro and have seperate companys....I have only been with apple for the past 4 years and it seems like they keep pushing off more Pro products, hardware and software, to release 10 new Ipods, phones, and crap like that. I mean apertures falling behind, there Mac pros are so old for the money.The reason I switched was for the rock solid reliability and there top notch machines....looks like I was fooled.