Regarding the full backup issue, as mentioned above, in my case the problem stopped after I switched from using a afp share to a SMB share. Even if you open a Finder window with the go to folder option and type in /Volumes, you will see the mounted TM volume but if you drag it to the Spotlight privacy panel, you get an alert stating "xxx volume is a TimeMachine Backup volume, you can't add it to the privacy list" With the user interface, you can't select the mounted volumes as the file selection panel doesn't allow you to go to /Volumes. Privacy tab allows you to exclude volumes or folders, but not TM mounted volumes. Give us back the basic and robust functionalities we always loved with our macs and stop letting interns updating core technologies making it unusable It's such a pain that TM that was a must have option that I always used since it's introduction is now disabled by default because I can't bear to have my MBP overheating with fans blowing will I'm just doing basic work with it (office work, not 3D games or video editing) Not to mention that even if I don't use the laptop, the display is off due to energy saver, but the MBP is warm/hot and not sleeping at all during that time. I also have multi tons of "Aug 16 16:58:06 MacBook-Pro-2018 (.01000000-0100-0000-0000-000000000000): Service exited due to SIGKILL | sent by mds" flooding the system.log.ġ process killed every 10-15 seconds, figure!Īll in all, the whole backup task is taking ~20-30 minutes at a minimum, every hour, with enough CPU activity to have fans blowing all the time and slowdowns.
It even preclude the MBP to go to sleep with assertions saying "waiting for backupd" and "waiting for backup indexing to finish", plus diskarbitrationd (for mounting the share), etc. With a lot of mds and mdworker CPU workload. Investigating this, I found that after each hourly backup from TM, Spotlight start indexing (reindexing?) things on the TM share reading and writing GBs of data over the network. Then, I realized that actual network exchanges are multi GB per hour. I switched from afp to SMB share because I regularly was facing issues with the backup and TM asking to do a fresh full backup of my MBP internal 1TB SSD every now and then.īut, first surprising thing is that since I updated to Big Sur every hourly snapshot could be hundred of megabytes even if I'm just having simple activity like writing mails or word documents. Time machine activated on a Synology DS920+. Repeated reading/writing of large amounts of data to the NAS HDDs is going to significantly shorten their lifetime.While all this is going on, my LAN is slowed down.Well, while this Time Machine incremental backup was running, the PECI CPU temperature was only 47 ✬ and the fans were not running hard (iStatistica sensors). I read that one of the commoner reasons for kernel_task running a lot is to control CPU usesage, to ensure the CPU doesn't overheat. However, kernel_task isn't taking much CPU time - kernel_task was taking about 2% of CPU time. Activity Monitor shows kernel_task as having sent 618 MB and received 8.6 GB (!) over the network and read/written 2.69 GB/2.61 GB to the internal HDD. When I checked the Synology NAS, Time Machine was still logged in as a user. Time Machine, from the icon in the menu bar seemed to think it had finished the backup within a few minutes. As Time Machine started preparing the backup, kernel_task kicked in. I have just now watched, on Activity Monitor, Time Machine do a 156 MB incremental backup.
Investigating further, and watching Activity Monitor, this seems to be associated with kernel_task.
Some months ago, I don't recall exactly when, I noticed that Time Machine backups, even small incremental backups seemed to be taking a very long time. I do Time Machine backups to a NAS and I use the NAS only for Time Machine backups.Ĭurrently the NAS has 2 x 4 TB HDDs (both less than a year old) set up as a single RAID volume - the useable space on this volume is about 3.7 TB with around 60% (2.22 TB) used, the remainder free. OK, so I don't know if this is an issue with macOS or Synology NAS but I'll ask here and again in the Synology forums - I have upgraded operating systems on both recently.