Forum Replies Created

Page 113 of 118
  • Alex Gerulaitis

    March 1, 2011 at 11:40 pm in reply to: metalan server – impressed to say the least

    Adam – thanks for sharing – yours is a great testimony to Tiger Tech and MetaLAN.

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 28, 2011 at 8:01 pm in reply to: nVidia Quadro 600

    [Ofer Geva] “What do you think about the nVidia Quadro 600 for Premiere rendering? Is it enough for working with Hi-Def or does the bar stand from 2000 and/or up?”

    In CS4, the graphics card doesn’t affect rendering.

    If you are looking for the least expensive way to get GPU acceleration in CS5, the GTX 470 is the least expensive approved card, and the GTX 460 is likely the least expensive “unapproved” one.

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 28, 2011 at 7:06 pm in reply to: Goodbye Apple MacBookPro , hello Mobile Hackintosh

    [Michael Aranyshev] “Check CalDigit SuperShare or Maxtronic ExaSAN”

    Sure, SAN functionality – but not LAN, i.e. no “clusters”, render farms or file-level shared access that doesn’t need SAN management software.

    I think the original poster meant “clusters” in terms of LAN, not SAN? If not – I stand corrected.

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 28, 2011 at 6:52 pm in reply to: metalan server – impressed to say the least

    [Adam Berk] “The AJA test on the macs is consistently reporting between 105MB/s and 110MB/s for both read and write. This system has been integrated into our single switch with our regular house network. Same subnet, no vlans, etc. The clients connect to the network via a single NIC. The metalan seems to be happily coexisting with the rest of the regular internet and lan traffic.

    Finder transfer speeds are now peaking up to 117MB/s.”

    Impressive. I didn’t think that was possible outside of iSCSI – especially with vanilla flavor NICs and switches. All that – with under $300 per client and under $600 per server?

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 27, 2011 at 10:55 pm in reply to: Raid5 setup on Mac Pro internal 4 drives

    [Matthew Chevalier] “is it possible to setup my mac pro (2×3 Ghz Quad-core Intel Xeon ) (2008) with a RAID5 startup disk using the 4 internal bays.”

    According to this, a Mac Pro RAID Card does exactly that – but it’s for “early 2009” models or later. Not sure if it’s available for your Mac Pro.

    Automatic rebuild (once you replace a failed drive) is a fairly standard feature of RAID5 controllers – but haven’t looked into the docs deep enough to see if this one does it.

    The installation is not for the faint of heart – requires re-routing cables assemblies on the motherboard:

    https://manuals.info.apple.com/en_US/MacPro_RAIDCard_Installation.pdf

    You may be better off with RAID1 using Mac OSX.

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 27, 2011 at 10:27 pm in reply to: Thunderbolt, really?

    [Alex Geroulaitis] “PCIe (and Express34/54) adapters for installation into existing laptops and desktops will arrive soon too.”

    I was so wrong – nothing like it. TBolt will not be available as on add-on card – but on motherboards only – apparently because it’s a combination interface (data and graphics) which is not feasible (or impossible) as an add-on card.

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 27, 2011 at 10:17 pm in reply to: metalan server – impressed to say the least

    [Adam Berk] “3 mac pro’s each playing back separate 1080p 23.98fps 8bit YUV uncompressed movies with stereo PCM audio in realtime simultaneously…

    …seeing Finder transfers to and from the server happen at 110MB/s… It’s just flat out crazy.”

    Congrats on getting fantastic performance at a great value. Getting GigE bus 100% saturated is no small feat. Maybe even 110%? 🙂

    What speeds does AHA System Test report this setup, from MetaLAN clients to your shared storage?

    Can you still run standard networking on MetaLAN-controlled NIC, or does MetaLAN completely take over it?

    Alex.

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 25, 2011 at 6:31 pm in reply to: Thunderbolt is here

    [Nate Stephens] “Are you saying that the 2 drive Thunderbolt SSD Raid 0 array is just 60mb/s slower?”

    No! 🙂 I have no idea how LaCie box performs – it may be as “slow” as 400MB/s.

    [Nate Stephens] “So what are the “troublesum” characteristics of SSD drives that we should be aware of?”

    None other than price. 🙂

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 25, 2011 at 6:07 pm in reply to: Thunderbolt is here

    [Nate Stephens] “So does a two drive SSD thunderbolt equal and 8 drive esata raid for performance on HD editing?”

    There are so many factors in play (drives, controller, internal bus, stripe settings) that it’s virtually impossible to say. Based on 6G MiniSAS tests though, an 8-drive RAID0 array will be faster (~ 900MB/s initially) than a 2-drive SSD RAID0 array (~840MB/s) in terms of transfer rates.

    Alex
    DV411

  • Alex Gerulaitis

    February 25, 2011 at 5:30 am in reply to: Thunderbolt is here

    [Andy Mees] “Just for reference, according to specs the Tbolt connection can deliver 10W of electrical power … ie enough to power a 3.5″ Hard Drive”

    Bottom line, you’re right: the majority of today’s HDDs consume less than 8W peak – making it possible to run them on TB bus power. I stand corrected!

    Alex
    DV411

Page 113 of 118

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy