Q: can I use the same drive to backup more than one computer

Yes you can use the same physical drive to backup 2 different Mac's with TM. But it would be best to partition that drive so each Mac has it's own partition for TM.

As Shootist007 says, it's best to create separate partitions.  See Time Machine - Frequently Asked Question #4 for details.

I recently added a G-Speed Q RAID array to my MAC PRO to use exclusively for back-up with Time Machine.  It worked great.  I then decided to also share the external device over hardwire lan with my wife's iMAC so whe could back-up with Time MAchine as well.  It also worked great.

I then started reading posts that suggested the two Time Machine instances would compete for space on the back-up array and eventually it would fill up a I'd have problems.  The solution, everyone said, was to partition the external drive and assign one to each Time Machine back-up.  I did this and everything seemed to be working great until the remote client tried to run back-up.

It fails with the "Disk does not support AFP features" error message.

Current status, local machine back-up works fine.  Remote machine cand find the drive and connect once I provide correct user name and password, but fails once back-up begins.

Both machines are running Lion 10.7.4.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

I saw this in your other thread, and was hoping a networking guru might answer, as it's a new one to me.

The only thing I can think of is, the setup of the disk.  It should have the GUID partition map scheme, and the partitions formatted Mac OS Extended (Journalled) or Mac OS Extended (Case-sensitive, journalled).

(The format on the one being used over the network really shouldn't matter, though, since Time Machine will create a sparse bundle disk image for those backups, unlike the one that's being backed-up to directly).

Did you use the procedure in Time Machine - Frequently Asked Question #22 to set up the remote Mac? If not, it's probably worth a try.

By dumb luck, not skill, I had followed the procedure #22, except for adding the remote backup drive to Login Items.  I have now done so, but still get the same error message.

I've tried setting everything back to "normal" and starting over, but still no luck.  One thing I did notice, the backup volume icon that appears on the source Mac desktop and in the Time Machine drive select window is a folder icon and not a drive icon.  However, in both "Get Info" and in the drive select window it indicates it is a "volume".  Also, the format is correct and Mac OS Extended (Journaled).

I'm out of ideas, so any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Hmm.  Again, I'm not a networking guru. 

Via the destination Mac, put a small file on the partition involved (like with TextEdit or the like).

Then see if you can connect to it from the source Mac, and read or copy the test file via the Finder.

The results may tell us something.

Good idea.  I put a Word doc on the drive at the destination Mac.  I had it immediately and could open and save it on the origin Mac.  So permissions and connectivity are deffinately in place.

I assume this is the message you're getting from Time Machine?

We started seeing that when Lion was first released, and most 3rd-party NAS drives hadn't been updated for the new requirements.  Since both of your Macs are on Lion, and you were able to get the file, I don't know what's going on.

Are you connecting as a registered user, not a guest?

Another thought . . . do you have a reasonably recent router (I don't think that should matter, but . . .)? 

What happens if you connect the Macs directly with an Ethernet cable?

In the meantime, I'll see if I can lasso a networking guru.

Disregard.

Pondini wrote:

 

We started seeing that when Lion was first released, and most 3rd-party NAS drives hadn't been updated for the new requirements.

Technically it is a "new requirement" because Apple finally carried through with a promise to deprecate the old algorithm. However, it is also nothing "new". According to Apple Developer documentation:

AFP 3.1

Introduced in Mac OS X 10.2, AFP 3.1 was a relatively minor release to tidy up some nagging Mac OS X issues.

• Added "DHX2" UAM

With 10.2, that would put this "new change" occuring on August 23rd, 2002. That isn't quite ten years ago, so I guess in terms of 3rd party support for Apple equipment, we can still call this "new". I can see how they would be caught blindsided by Apple changing specifications at a rate faster than once per decade. Who could keep up?

I owe you an apology.  My so-called friends here aren't helping. 

One is all ticked-off because he thinks you "threadjacked" -- added-on to a thread about a different subject.  While there is a difference (the original poster was, apparently, connecting each of his Macs to the drive in turn; not trying to back up one via network as you are), it doesn't seem like a hanging offense to me.

A couple of others seem convinced that since you're getting a message that we see with 3rd-party NAS drives, you must be using one.

So I'll ask you to start a new thread.  You can copy your first post, but it might help to detail your network, and mention that there's no NAS involved.  It shouldn't matter, but also specify how the PRO is connected to the RAID set.

I'll watch for it, and try again to get some assistance.

Pondini,

Thanks very much for investing your time on this issue.  It is sincerely appreciated.

It was never my intention to break protocol here.

I will start a new thread.

Regards,

SMS5572 wrote:

 

It was never my intention to break protocol here.

Pondini is not accurately reporting the context of a private conversation.

It's not a big deal and it isn't a protocol issue. If you jump into someone else's thread with what you think is the same problem, people who might know the answer could ignore the thread because the original poster's subject doesn't apply to your question. Plus, as in this case, if the original poster flags the question as "solved", people will naturally assume that the question is, indeed, solved, which, in this case, it is.

In your new question, it would also be a good idea to mention whether or not you are using Lion Server. As far as I know, only Lion Server and Time Capsule provide networked Time Machine services. From what I understand, you have to do a command-line hack to get Time Machine to recognize an unsupported shared drive. The key word there is "unsupported".

etresoft wrote:

 

SMS5572 wrote:

 

It was never my intention to break protocol here.

Pondini is not accurately reporting the context of a private conversation.

I disagee (you called it threadjacking twice), but we can argue about that elsewhere.

As far as I know, only Lion Server and Time Capsule provide networked Time Machine services

It is supported. 

From Lion (client) Help:

So many folks asked how to set it up that I wrote instructions on my web site -- Time Machine - Frequently Asked Question #22 -- no "unsupported" command needed.

Message was edited by: Pondini