But one day - about a week ago - the two ‘Volumes’ had different Modification Dates. So I was worried that I might run into future difficulties; and my tidy mind became determined to try and look into it more.
Sorry. A bit chaotic. That was one restart earlier.
It appears as though they are identical.
But (I may be being fanatical) it just doesn’t seem right. Particularly the sporadic nature of this behavior.
Our you can mount smb://nucleus, in which case the Nucleus will be mounted directly in Locations. So then you can click that and navigate Sidebar > nucleus > Data > Storage > InternalStorage.
Or you can mount smb://nucleus/Data/Storage by going to Finder > Go (in the menu bar) > Connect to server, and entering this there
And that’s because they are. They are just two separate entry points into the same physical location. As I said in the old post:
File servers are designed for sharing files to different clients at the same time, which would have them mounted. Usually it would be different machines mounting the shares, it’s just that in your case it’s the same machine apparently doing it twice.
But it would annoy me, too, for tidiness reasons, so I understand why you want to get rid of it. I still think you will have to figure out why the Mac is mounting the share twice, and it is not unheard of as I referenced back then:
It certainly happened before for other people, googling “SMB share mounted twice Mac” finds many instances, e.g.
In that case, at least for tonight (I so appreciate this help - and know it’s late where you are now too!) I am content that I (still/again) have access to my Watched folder.
If the IP Reservation has worked, I also have a potentially more appropriate and simpler setting for the Finder to get to the Nucleus.
Roon hasn’t once complained.
Could it be that the original cause has as much to do with that multiplicity of places in the hierarchy (smb://NUCLEUS as well as smb://NUCLEUS/Data as well as smb://NUCLEUS/Data/Storageetc) as anything; and - because they’re different - has tried to be ‘helpful’ by presenting me with both, albeit defaulting to ‘Internal Storage’?
I suspect the best thing now is to watch over all my next (re)boots and see if I get the duplication phenomenon again?
If so, then - as you say - we’ve eliminated a fair few options and combinations.
But - as I’ve just discovered - those representations (as ‘InternalStorage’) could well be somewhat generic ‘assimilations’ of/pointers to actually quite different locations down the hierarchy, couldn’t they?
Thanks, Mario !
Not least because the command line both has to (because they can’t have the same name) and does distinguish between two volumes - ‘InternalStorage’ and ‘InternalStorage - 1’.
Unless macOS creates a symbolic link (and we all know just how complex Apple has made those - viz. Time Machine’s - when compared with the original FreeBSD.
Indeed I shall. Other utilities like this one also do definitely see two distinct Volumes!
I looked at those again. A fair few of the comments reference a possible association with certain (e.g. ‘old’) user accounts and the OS’s apparent need to distinguish between them; and the use of aliases. Neither applies in this case.
Knowing that it’s not a unique phenomenon is somewhat re-assuring. But I couldn’t find another case on this forum.
Checking in here since some time has passed. Thank you for your generous contributions in other Support threads in the meantime.
We’ve reviewed the thread with development and have a few thoughts:
A Bonjour Sleep Proxy issue as @mikeb is certainly a possible mechanism, although we can’t prove from available diagnostics that mDNS proxying is happening here
Have you at any time mounted this location via hostname and via IP address separately?
you can view mount history on a Mac by opening Terminal and entering mount.
What happens if you disable WiFi temporarily and leave only the hardwire connection to the storage location?
I believe that the issue is essentially solved - largely thanks to @Suedkiez’s and @Michael_Harris’s posts.
How kind of you to say that! But I am the grateful one: to everyone else who is so generous with their time and expertise.
I can see how that might be.
Almost certainly - at least, since (and in the course of setting) the Reserved Address solution, which seems to have fixed it. Again, thanks: I can see why and how.
I’ll try that if the phenomenon ever comes back. But it does seem as though addressing the Nucleus with its assigned IP address has stopped any (which I’m OK with) representation of the Volume, Nucleus/InternalStorage, from appearing.
Has this in any way been useful for your (internal) FAQ as a potential oddity which may affect other users with a configuration similar to mine?