Fcp and Isis

[Alex Gerulaitis]

Christopher,

Where are you located?

Do you already have a SAN switch and a metadata controller?

If so, it’s a matter of choosing any decent (optimized for latency and bandwidth) Fibre Optical storage system (Promise, Caen, JMR, etc.), i.e. it doesn’t have to be one of the systems you listed.

Alex (DV411)

[Douglas Learner]

You’ve also got metaSAN as an option to Xsan, though I don’t know if you consider such a change ‘upgrading.’

[Jason Myres]

Here is a pretty informative thread regarding the same question:

https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/8/1121011

For what it’s worth though, I don’t think you’re going to find a better way to take care of 25 FCP workstations than an Xsan. That includes StorNext (DVS), which I am a big fan of.

If I was in your position, I’d be upgrading to Xsan 2.2.1 and 10.6.4, and riding with that for the next 2-3 years. Even if it required the use of Mac Pro MDCs. There is nothing that can touch a 2.2 Xsan when used with FCP for performance, scalability, ease-of-use, and Apple compatibility.

If you go and get real, comparable estimates, for ISIS, Isilon, StorNext, or even Facilis, those quotes will not be small.

JM

[Bob Zelin]

Just for the record, Michael writes –

With a single 1GB pipe toa client station, we are getting speeds exceeding 100MB/s. Once you start adding on users, or not using supported configs, this drops. The correct NIC on a PC is paramount (onboard doesn’t cut it). You can also do a bonded 1GB, and we have seen speeds around 180MB/s. On each chassis, you can expect “around” 300MB/s total.

REPLY – I have a lot of experience with bonding ethernet ports (LACP), and NIC bonding on the client side back to the switch DOES NOT increase bandwidth, so I have no idea of what miracle you performed to bond two 1Gig ports on the client side to get 180MB/sec per client.

You have 25 clients – if they are all going to be doing multiple streams of ProRes422HQ, you will have a bottleneck at some point with the speed of your drive array – no matter what system you purchase. People foolishly think that if they spend a lot of money, they can do anything. Well, you can’t.

Bob Zelin

[Christopher Lowden]

Many thanks for the returns.
The current setup of 35 terra promise, xsan 2.2 and 3 xserve controllers in failover, has worked surprisingly well for the past 3 years. It serves 25 FCP suites in PAL for predominately live TV shows. The turnaround is very fast. In the coming year, I am obliged to make everyone work in HD, therefore why I am investigating new solutions. To keep my current workflow in HD, I would need to triple the size of the server and that means loads of money. Money is not the issue, it is all about performance, stability and constructor . But when I look under the bonnet, I see that the servers crash repeatedly, there aer chronic problems with the metadata not being in phase with the fibre, chronic issues with file authorisations changing and terrible problems with licences that disappear and then reappear. You may say these are setup issues, but I feel that the xsan is not a dedicated video solution. It is more of a patch work IT solution that is admittedly very versatile and pretty high performance. It is such a shame that while Apple is leaving the enterprise market, it does not offer a credible alternative for large installations. So I am looking around. As for Metasan, I looked into it and found that it slowed down the system alot.

But all in all, it is logic that I continue with xsan but what future is there for xsan?

[Andrew Richards]

Apple is abandoning enterprise? I guess I missed the press release. I suppose you mean the Xserve, but the death if the Xserve does not augur anything really, especially with Thunderbolt’s advent. The dev preview of OS X Lion includes Xsan, so there is no reason to believe Apple is abandoning it. Indeed, Apple specifically mentioned Fibre Channel in their feature page for Thunderbolt, and that can’t be an accident. Are your Xserve MDC machines very old? You should look into ActiveSAN as an option when it comes out.

Now, given that you already have the Xsan Fibre Channel infrastructure and the clients in place, all you would need to buy to scale up is more RAID arrays. I can’t see how you could find a less expensive storage option to meet your needs than expanding your existing system when you already own the stuff that makes Xsan more expensive than the Ethernet options and it is still good.

Best,
Andy

[Bob Zelin]

Great advice Andrew –
get an Active SAN next month to replace the XServe metadata controller, and replace your antique Promise arrays with Active Storage fibre arrays, and call it a day.

Bob Zelin

[Christopher Lowden]

Dear Bob
Thank you very much for the precious advise. It is just what I was looking for.

Andrew, Also thanks for the reply.
Concerning my Apple enterprise comments, what I mean is that Apple has never really penetrated the enterprise market. They have expensive products that are less reliable in comparison to Windows and with an after sales service that is extremely poor. In france, where I live, it is non-existent.

I also oversee large Avid installations which, like Avid or not, offer a very efficient enterprise class service and solution. Yes, it is not the same price at all and in reality not really the same market, but all the same an ISIS or Unity are still just media server. But that is where the comparison ends. I tried running 25 workstations using Active Directory on an xserve with xsan. It was a disaster. I don’t get these problems with Avid or other enterprise oriented products. All the same, personally I would buy a mac over a PC any day.

[Andrew Richards]

I’d agree Apple has been inconsistent in their “enterprise” strategy. However, StorNext is a great deal more “enterprise” than Xsan for MDCs, and that is what the new ActiveSAN is going to be- StorNext on Linux. We are all waiting to see what it will cost, but I can vouch for StorNext as a very well-supported product. When all you use Xsan for is as a client of StorNext, the stability improves significantly. However, if you are also an Avid shop I can see why you’d be considering consolidating onto a storage platform both environments can use.

Best,
Andy

[Mark Raudonis]

[Christopher Lowden] “I tried running 25 workstations using Active Directory on an xserve with xsan. It was a disaster. “

Christopher,

I’ve been following your posts for years, so I know you’re not a total idiot… but I can’t let this comment go unanswered.

Whatever you personal experience there are plenty of people that have had success with X-SAN. I am one of them. Three X-SAN’s with over a 100+ users. Active storage is our Raid of choice. Low rez and HI Rez, we handle it all. I don’t know quite why you’re so down on it, but I just had to offer another opinion.

Mark