SAN setup

[Caspian Brand]

Hello Bjarki,

If you are going to use your current in-wall cabling, you’ll want to ensure all the lines and patch points are capable of GbE speeds. Each client machine will need to have their own GbE path to your server or storage device, if you have multiple lines in the walls I would assume there are patch points at either end. Assuming these lines are GbE, they could be run through a switch or directly to your server or storage device.

Using the Small Tree card, a MacPro and CalDigit storage is really a BYON (Build Your Own NAS) setup, which is different from a SAN, in that you are relying on the power of your MacPro as well as the storage for performance to it’s network shares.

A SAN can use similar hardware, but would provide block level access to storage which is then managed by SAN software vs. built-in OS networking. SAN hardware doesn’t necessarily need as much CPU and RAM configurations that NAS setups require in order to gain multiple streams of HD video. Additionally, some NAS solutions require the use of Jumbo Frames for good performance, which the newer i5 and i7 iMacs do not support. SAN networking protocols like iSCSI do not have a major performance hit by the lack of Jumbo Frames like NAS systems do.

If you’d like, I can put you in touch with a customer of ours using our EVO SAN & NAS solution in Iceland. If you email me at: cbrand@studionetworksolutions.com I can put you in touch with them and you might be able to arrange to check it out in person.

You can also read more about it here:
https://www.studionetworksolutions.com/products/product_detail.php?pi=12

We can do custom configurations with all GbE as well to help fit it into your budget, and still have the system be capable of Fibre Channel in the future should you need it, making it a more well rounded “future proof” solution.

Best Regards,
-Caspian

Product Specialist
Studio Network Solutions

[Bob Zelin]

Hi guys.

REPLY – HI.

Here’s my idea of how we could do it, and I’d love some feedback. We have 2 Mac Pro workstations, 2 iMac editing stations and a audio post setup.

REPLY – this is 5 clients. IF the audio post setup is a ProTools system, you will not be able to retrieve multi tracks of audio without an iSCSI solution, likefrom Studio Network Solutions. But if you just want “push pull” for the Pro Tools system (dragging files to the video editors, not playing it back live), then yes this will work perfectly.

We have a Mac Pro that I think we’ll use as a server. Although it’s old, it’s still a quad-core machine, so it’s probably overkill. I’m thinking this machine hooked up to something like the Caldigit HDPro2, filled with WD Caviar Black 2TB drives.

REPLY – You know, Cal Digit sells SuperShare, which is a turnkey SAN solution, that uses the HDPro2 drive arrays. But yes, you can build this yourself with the MAC Pro Quad Core (even if it is older), and the Cal Digit HD Pro 2 that you already own. You may see some latency issues in playback, but generally, yes this will work.

I’d use the Small Tree PEG6 (six port) gigabit Ethernet card. I’m not sure the sound guy needs to be on the SAN, but it just makes sense to got the six port rather than four for future-proofing.

REPLY – this is the correct card. You can direct connect with seperate subnets, but you can avoid all this confusion if you link aggregate to a Small Tree switch.

I’ve been reading on this forum about the different SAN software to run this kind of thing, but I’d really like to hear what you like best.

REPLY – you DO NOT NEED ANY SAN SOFTWARE to make this work. You do not need FibreJet or XSAN for example. Apple File Sharing will work just fine.

Also, we have wiring in our facility with ethernet sockets in the wall. Can I patch through these or do I need a single cable for each computer?

REPLY -each computer will need a DEDICATED ethernet line for this process. You cannot share internet access, and local network activity with this type of shared storage system. You run a dedicated ethernet cable from each computer back to the PEG 6 card (or Small Tree switch), and then you will have no problems.

IF you would like to see some pictures of what a system like this looks like, you can poke around my website at https://www.bobzelin.com

It is always easier to buy a turnkey solution from fine companies like Studio Network Solutions, Edit Share, Maxx Digital, Small Tree and others. But if you want to try it yourself – well, someone can always get you out of trouble.

Bob Zelin

Thanks in advance,
Bjarki

[Bjarki Gudjonsson]

How great is the COW? Thanks for your replies!

The cabling isn’t hooked up to the network I’m already running – I could patch from the server into a numbered patch witch matches up with the suites. Buuuut, my gut tells me all interconnections on the way can only be trouble, so I’d go for a single cable – it’s not a problem.

Thanks for the heads up on the Jumbo frames issue. One of our iMacs is indeed an i7, so that needs to be thought out.

Caspian, I’ll send you an email. I think I know the client here you speak of. I’d love to get a turnkey solution – in the end it’ll come down to prices. That said, I know a BYON will always cost less, but if the jump isn’t that much more painful – I’m willing to look at anything. And I love the words “future proof”.

Bob – linking aggregate to a switch is definitely clever, but would it make a difference if I only have these 4-5 workstations (hooking the sound suite up to it isn’t really that important – it could have access to the shared volume through ethernet sharing via the server and it would be enough). I’d need to run the ethernet cables anyway, right?

Also, I looked at the Supershare, which looks really nice. What does that do that my suggested setup doesn’t?

Thanks again,
Bjarki

[Bob Zelin]

SuperShare is a propriatary solution, that requires the Cal Digit HDPro. It does not use ethenet – it uses fibre cables, with the special cards that Cal Digit supplies for each client (they plug into the Super Share switch). You will also need a SAN managment software like MetaSAN or FibreJet or XSAN to run the SuperShare solution (it’s like the ATTO Faststream). So as far as “cheap” goes – it’s cheaper to try your ethernet solution first.

The new i7 iMAC does not support jumbo frames, so you will limited to about 50 – 60MB/sec (90 -100MB/sec with Jumbo frames). If all you want to do is one stream of ProRes422HQ, then you can live without jumbo frames. Most people want multiple streams.

Bob Zelin

[Hreinn Beck]

Hi Bjarki,

We have Studio Network’s EVO (https://www.studionetworksolutions.com/products/product_detail.php?pi=12) at our facility and use the SanMP software for management.

We are using it with 6 Mac’s on fiber and the system is both reliable and fast. The EVO can be setup with fiber or ethernet ports depending on your needs. I’d highly recommend fiber for the Mac Pro’s and dedicated ethernet for the iMacs and audio.

You are welcome to come and check it out anytime.

Cheers,
Hreinn Beck
Kukl ehf.
Krokhals 6
110 Reykjavik
Iceland

[James O’connor]

Hi Bob,

I keep reading with interest “you don’t need any kind of SAN software”… but I’m wondering – and posted elsewhere – what takes control of the storage pool? We had Caldigit hardware too and their controller cards were nice and all, but doing online expansions is crippled by OS X not recognising the partition increase. How do we scale the storage without xSan?

I’m about to go Small-Tree/GraniteSTOR/Switch… the works… but how do I scale my storage and keep it as one volume as my business grows?

Thanks for all your help. Every forum I read comes back to your knowledge and input.

[Bob Zelin]

the wonderful Studio Network Solutions is volume based. You create virtual volumes, not one storage pool, that appears as one drive to all the editors. In the system I have proposed, you use a single individual volume. Once you add a second array, it is NOT part of the first volume – it is a discreet volume (that appears as Volume 2 for example in the sharing window). What is the problem of having
Volume1 and Volume 2 on the client desktops, instead of one big 64 TB volume ?

Bob Zelin

[Eric Hansen]

i would like to add one thought to the one big volume vs multiple volumes debate:

if you’re working with multiple projects, it’s not that difficult to spread them on different volumes. we do this for all the different TV shows we’re working on. we have 3 RAIDs which show up as 3 volumes. when we add another RAID, we’ll just make another volume available to the editor as Volume 4.

as the administrator, the nice thing about multiple volumes is the option to take them offline occasionally for maintenance, without affecting editors working on the other volumes. if a drive fails in a RAID and it then slows down to do the rebuild process, it doesn’t slow the entire SAN down. it will just slow down the one volume associated with that RAID. or if i need to defrag the RAID, i can take that one volume offline so it can be defragged (or erased) without bringing the whole SAN down.

even if OS X allowed us to grow the Volume as we add more RAIDs, i wouldn’t do it. for maintenance and overall system performance reasons, i recommend multiple volumes with 1 RAID per volume.

e

Eric Hansen – http://www.erichansen.tv