-
Simple SAN
So a basic set of questions.
Current setup is 3-4 stations that do editing using Final Cut. We sneaker net things around using external drives. New project = new external drive generally.
There is some talk but no real budget for some type of shared storage.
In order of priority, these are the goals.
= Shared storage for archive / backup after project completion.
(If this is all we can afford that is fine).= Shared storage for single user at a time editing of a project, but with files on server for editing.
(This is all we need)Preliminary thinking
= 6-12 disk raid storage box with 2+ GB uplink ports w/ Jumbo Frames and Link Aggregation to switch
= Managed GB network switch, with GB links to edit workstations, again with jumbo frames.
= SMB/AFS as the protocol for archive / backup solutions.
= iSCSI for the protocol for over the network editing using Studio Networks iSCSI initiator.
My questions:
Archiving clearly would work using what I think of as “file level” sharing. Ie, AFP/CIFS/SMB in a big shared drive essentially, after project is done, dump HD to network location, and scrub drive a week later once off-site backup is cleanly away.
For editing using final cut I assume a block level solution a-la iSCSI or a SAN or DAS is needed for things to be reasonably fast. Is this correct?
Has anyone ever used Studio Networks iSCSI initiator for something like this?
Is it best to a create a single iSCSI volume per project, or is it possible to create a larger iSCSI volume that multiple clients can connect to with multiple project folders without messing things up? This would be ideal but not required.
Thanks for any and all pointers. I expect to move in small steps on this, once the network is upgraded and speed tested starting a small NAS device to get some basic file sharing up and running.
-
2 Replies
-
Adam writes –
Studio Networks iSCSIWell Adam, how about calling Studio Network Solutions, and let them sell you a system that works. Exactly what are you trying to accomplish here, use the iSCSI initiator from SNS for free, and build your own SAN system for $2000 ?
Everything you are describing is being done by lots of companies that participate on this forum (including Studio Network Solutions).
You can have the system that you are describing for around the $10,000 price point. If that is simply too much money, and you want to try to figure out how to do it with the drives you have lying around, and a $200 Netgear switch, and an old PC as the server, you will fail.AFP will work just fine for file level sharing. You create one big volume, and simply create folders for your individual projects – just like you do right now with your stand alone FCP system. You don’t use a seperate FW drive for each job, do you? Oh, I guess you do – I reread your post.
Bob Zelin
-
As Bob said, AFP will work fine for file-level sharing. It is pretty efficient and you might only get marginally better performances using an iSCSI initiator.
Windows servers usually make poor servers for video editing on Mac. But using metaLAN Server, you can turn a windows machine into an excellent server for Mac or Windows editing. We have totally revamped metaLAN 4.5. The new performances are now on par with iSCSI and exceed regular shares (I’ve seen 50% increase). metaLAN uses a proprietary block-level protocol over TCP/IP but this protocol handles file-level sharing – as opposed to iSCSI which requires SAN management software on top.
So depending the type of footage you are editing, this might be another option to consider. Typically metaLAN works best for up to ProRes editing. For higher bandwidth requirements (uncompress HD, 2K, etc.), you should still consider FC.
A faster machine will help for efficient link aggregation, but other than that, a fast bus and efficient NIC interface and a fast switch are the main requirements for metaLAN Server.
Bernard Lamborelle
bernard at tiger-technology dot com
http://www.tiger-technology.com
514-667-2015
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up