Is Time Machine dealing with Fusion virtual machines differently now?

Question

I have discovered and others have noted that TM backs up Fusion VMs as a single file. For me, this has been roughly 32GB a pop, chewing up my 500GB TM target volume breathtakingly quickly. Suddenly, however, changes within the VM are requiring only about 7.6GB per TM back-up, roughly one-quarter of the previous amount. Does anyone know what's going on here? I downloaded the usual monthly bushel of Windows automatic updates (security, stability, enhancements, etc.) yesterday for my Vista Ultimate guest VM; could these somehow have made the TM process for a Fusion VM more efficient? This seems too good to be true!

Answer 1

All --
The most knowlegeable VMware employee at the Fusion booth at Macworld (two other VMware employees there did not know) told me definitively that Fusion virtual machines are no longer being backed up by Time Machine.
On December 23rd, in another thread, Kimo said (see also Peggy Lynn's posts, above):
"At this link you'll find the Fusion 1.1 release notes http://www.vmware.com/support/fusion/doc/releasenotes_fusion.html
"Fusion 1.1 was the upgrade that Vmware provided at the end of november.
As you can see they don't mention any issue with Time Machine.
But searching around I've found the Fusion 1.1. RC1 release notes at this link
http://www.vmware.com/beta/fusion/releasenotes_fusion.html
"In this document you can find this section:
"-Leopard's Time Machine feature causes VMware Fusion 1.1 RC1 to hang.
In Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard), the Time Machine feature interferes with the Virtual Machines directory, causing VMware Fusion to hang when you launch it.
Workaround: Configure Time Machine to exclude the Virtual Machines folder.
This problem is planned to be fixed for the upcoming VMware Fusion 1.1 GA release. Virtual machines will be excluded from Time Machine backups...
"...and they did it!
"They should announce it, in the right way, with the final 1.1. release notes. I can confirm, now, that my first 2 backups (of my vmware files) were done before the fusion 1.1 upgrade.
The day I've installed the upgrade backups have been stopped.
"I'm not glad for this, It should be a decision of mine..."
I completely agree with Kimo. I have reviewed the 1.1 GA release notes, again, and can find no mention of Time Machine. Someone new to Fusion who trialed or purchased Fusion 1.1 GA would not be able to tell from a read of the Release Notes that her/his VM was excluded from TM backup. VMware indicated to me that they made this move, in cooperation with Apple, because the problem outlined above would occur if TM ran when a Fusion VM was active.
I have been waiting for Dave Nanian to e-v-e-n-t-u-a-l-l-y update SuperDuper! to an exalted state of Leopard compatibility and, frankly, have in the interim been doing less frequent clone backups with CCC. As a consequence, I have been less protected (with respect to my data in the Vista VM) than I thought I was.
Let me state the obvious: because, for many of us, the data in our VMs is precious, it is irresponsible for VMware to make a unilateral and fundamental change in a backup modality that is, after all, part of OSX, without giving the user a choice (the bug doesn't manifest itself if the VM isn't active; I just shut mine down to do periodic TM backups without mishap) and (ii) proactive notification of registered users -- they have the email addresses! That Apple was apparently a part of this is quite disappointing as well.
More of the obvious: if you are a Fusion user, you should -- for sure -- rely on a backup approach other than TM to protect your VM data.
Regards.