-
Do we need some kind of metadata controller in a 10 Gbit based shared storage network?
Hi all,
sorry if this is an exceptionally dumb question (or in the wrong forum altogether) but I need to make sure I’m going in the right direction.
We plan to set up a shared storage:- existing (overpowered and under-used) recent HP file server upgraded with additional fibre-based storage
- Server gets upgraded with a 2-port 10 Gbit card
- Uplink to Cisco switch that is upgraded with 2 additional 10 Gbit ports
- connection to 2 main PC-based editing machines using 10 Gbit ethernet
- additional secondary machines using 1 Gbit ethernet
Having had a look at a FC based SAN before I know you need to have metadata controllers for shared access to the same data/partition when you set up a SAN. Is that because the FC connection has no logic whatsoever that takes care of simultaneous accesses?
Am I right to assume that we can “just plug” the machines to our switch, configure the network (separate Vlan for each 10 Gbit connection?) and start working without worrying what happens if 2 users access the same material?
Software environment: Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows 7 64 bit (primary editing), Windows 7 32 bit (secondary editing), Adobe CS 5.5 packages
We can’t simply set up a new server/NAS since this has to fit into a heavily regulated corporate network environment so using the existing managed server and switches is the best option. Having our own isolated storage system beats the purpose of having the data (at least potentially) accessible for the whole department (25+). Our IT/network department is helping us with this but they typically don’t mess with video editing.
Many thanks
Mike
-
4 Replies
-
I do not recommend sharing the storage from the file server via SMB over the Gbit connections. It’s best to turn your file server into a master meta-data controller and turn the client workstations into redundant MDCs with something like metaSAN.
You can’t just plug in everyone into the switch and directly mount your shared storage to all client machines unless that volume is a managed share from the file server or the network is running under some kind of SAN.
-
@Brandon: thanks for the pointer – seems like I haven’t expressed myself really well:
we deliberately don’t want to set up a SAN (mainly a cost and management issue).Instead we want to beef up the server’s storage (with an external storage module since our 2 height-unit server is pretty limited in that regard) and share that as a managed share through the server.
You are implying that we only need meta-data controllers if we directly mount the storage – right?
Because that’s what we won’t do at any rate. The storage module is just a second chassis that’s connected to the server’s raid controller as far as I know.Cheers,
Mike
-
exactly. if you are using a managed volume(s) share via the server itself over say SMB then you do not need to establish a storage area network with metadata controllers.
I would guess that what you propose will work with a limited number of clients with this scenario, but if you go beyond a few clients a SAN will give you a lot better performance but will also require primary and redundant MDCs.
-
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
In the foreseeable future we won’t go beyond 2 or maybe 3 main editing stations (these will be connected through 10gbe). We just want something more flexible than local storage – while having somewhat comparable performance.
The occasional previewing of files or encoding smaller projects can happen over 1gbe connections.
Btw: we are usually not working on uncompressed HD.
Our setup may even be a bit overdone but given the existing server and switches (4-port) link aggregated 1gpe won’t be that much cheaper and would still be slower.
Mike
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up