-
New Mac Pro TB 2.0 Shared Storage
So….this is interesting. From Apple’s website “Want to hook up for a simple and fast local transfer? IP over Thunderbolt support in OS X Mavericks gives you a 10Gb connection to another Mac for the cost of a mere cable. Connect several Mac Pro systems together with Thunderbolt cables and you have an instant network render cluster.”
I doubt anybody knows yet but this is pretty promising for small studios like mine. I’m one of those guys running gigabit from an Xserve (plus raid) to half a dozen computers..mostly for 3D and After FX projects but also some FCP editing. If I can run multiple TB 2.0 cables from a new Mac Pro to three or four other computers (assuming TB RAID Storage taking up at least one of the 6 ports on the Mac Pro server) that would be pretty cool.
I suppose cable length (and cost) come into play, and whether or not I could link in a PC or two…but being able to bypass 10GB ethernet or Fiber using built in hardware is a pretty big deal. It may not be quite as fast or flexible…but is sure beats $1K a pop for a Fiber or 10GB card…much less a switch (whose prices still haven’t come down hardly at all).
Just thinking out loud…
-Greg
Greg Leuenberger
CEO
Sabertooth Productions, Inc.
http://www.sabpro.com -
4 Replies
-
Sorry Greg, but you seem to be making a false assumption here.
The ability to transfer files quickly, or to setup a fast render cluster, is quite a bit different than what it takes to share media among several client workstations with sustained video playback for ALL.
David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.comSales | Integration | Support
David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
Well….why? Give me some facts, because I need more than that. : )
What is it about transferring data via Thunderbolt that would make it worse than Ethernet? No traffic management if more than one workstation is requesting data from the server? Seems like from a throughput standpoint this would work, but that’s why I’m asking.
-Greg
Greg Leuenberger
CEO
Sabertooth Productions, Inc.
http://www.sabpro.com -
Agreed, this is interesting and should work for the purpose.
The question is though whether Mavericks TCP/IP stack is well optimized to handle TB speeds. I think this is what DRW meant. AFAIK it’s not (well optimized) – one of the reasons companies like Small-Tree are in business with their 10GbE Mac-specific solutions.
— Alex Gerulaitis | Systems Engineer | DV411 – Los Angeles, CA
-
Those are 2 different priority type processes or workflows. File transfer and distributed rendering are not realtime processes. They are lower priority processes which latency has far less effect on or doesn’t have an effect at all. The only real latency concern with distributed rendering is managed by the host player and that application may have a limit in how long it will wait for data. File transfers obviously have no priority concern. Realtime playback ie editing, compositing applications have a realtime priority status. This means latency of data response is critical to the application functionality. Current 10Gbe Ethernet cards and switches have considerable resources behind them both at the controller, OS, and infrastructure level to optimize data flow and lower latency in communication. Managed switches alone also have a dramatic effect on the latency of packets from source to destination. This is a considerable pipeline that is accomplishing this realtime playback. The question is can Thunderbolt in network packet protocol mode function with the latency it has with a 6 device limitation for realtime processes on chain versus a hardware 10Gbe Ethernet switch and also can the controller handle the load a 10Gbe network card can at that latency required for realtime processes. That is what he is talking about and what I questions currently.
Eric-ADK
Tech Manager
support@adkvideoediting.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up