James Bucanek wrote: ...
Andrew Reid wrote: b) Does the archive volume even have to support any Apple-centric (HFS) features. What features does the volume need to support.
QRecall makes as few assumptions about the filesystem that the archive is located on as it can. So it should work on any filesystem that OS X supports.
It is, however, still being accessed via the Core Services framework in OS X. Apple has deprecated this framework and QRecall is currently being rewritten to use only the low-level BSD filesystem APIs. This should provide even better compatibility with foreign filesystems in the future, but for now QRecall has problems with some filesystems that aren't compatible with the Core Services APIs. For example, QRecall can't currently store an archive on a ZFS volume from TenOne at the movement because of quirks in the Core Services framework.
Thank you for your prompt and clear reply. The NAS's I wish to use vary widely from VM based ones to ones having a ZFS underlying filesystem. None of them are Windows based and very few of them are OS X based, so I wish to get off that treadmill of finding a netatalk version which works with a particular vesrion of OS X. Your system with the archive in an
opaque (not a criticism) container seems to help this.
I will test out the software I will try the archive on a NFS volume with and without the sparsebundle and report back.
The sparse bundle has appeal as it can be encrypted, and it allows for network efficient offsite backup
of the archive . I did read the note about caution in using encrypted sparsebundles as archive volumes, can you expand a bit on that ?
Thanks again, this looks like a very well engineered product.