> On Feb 14, 2022, at 11:34 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Feb 13, 2022, at 10:10 PM, Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Lightroom breaks on symbolic links. >> > > I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind your movements of files in > this workflow.
I do my heavy lifting of processing on the files while they are on the fast SSD. When I’m done I archive them to the big spinny drives. It gives me speed when I need it and it also separates the active files from the archives. > > Or why you're using symbolic links and such. How do you "point lightroom …" > at a symbolically linked file system location? It was never designed to be > used that way, and I'm sure never tested in that context. For reasons my mac pro ended up with two SSDs. A 1TB SATA drive that had been in a laptop at one point and a PCIE card with two 1TB mSATA drives set up as an apple raid, which I had been using as my root drive. However, Catalina will not install/run on an apple RAID so I have to use the SATA as my boot drive for Catalina. That means that I can also use Open Core and boot into High Sierra on the 2TB ssd RAID drive for things that Catalina breaks. By symbolically linking to my home directory on the big drive: 1) I have a lot more space accessible to my home directory than if it were on the smaller drive. 2) No matter which OS I boot into, I always have the same home directory with all of my files. > > It's rarely a good idea to mix using macOS and UNIX file system > commands/directives/concepts with commercial apps that were designed to use > macOS file system interfaces, despite that macOS contains within it a UNIX > kernel. As you said, MacOS is Unix. BSD should be no BFD. > > My backups happen completely external to LR, using backup software that > operates as a completely separate application in the macOS file system. It > moves/duplicates files (both original image files and catalog files) to > archive external storage drives from my working drives (whether internal or > external) seamlessly. LR has never once had any issues with my doing this, > and I've not lost a single file in the course of replacing disk drives gone > bad with data (both catalogs and image files) repopulated from the archives. > I don't know why you'd want to create backups from within LR, if that's what > you're doing (which is hard to figure from the description of your file > workflow). Setting up an automated backup is on my todo list, but the backup procedure is beside the point. I don’t set up backups from within LR. I just use the LR move to move files from the “fast active” drive to the “slow long term storage” drive. Generally if I’m working with files on the spinny it’s only a few at a time, not the large amounts that I’ll generate while photographing an event. > > It seems to me that you might be making some assumptions about the internal > operation of the macOS file system and how LR interacts with it that are not > quite robust. I’m making the assumption that LR properly handles file systems. It’s not rocket surgery. This is the first time I’ve ever used a program that didn’t properly handle this situation. -- Larry Colen [email protected] -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
