[Bernard Lamborelle]

Hi Kevin,

Indeed, we’re all somewhat biased… ?

I believe that all the solutions you mentioned (as well as Lumaforge) are fairly mature and should give you satisfaction on performance because ProRes 4444HQ only requires 250MB/sec. So for 5 workstations, that’s a total of 1GB/sec. As such, 16 drives should deliver enough performance for your requirements (please consider more drives if you plan multicam or do lots of ingest/data copies WHILE editing). A single 10GbE link per workstation will also be fine.

The main difference between these various systems will likely be in the proposed workflow and how you can integrate them in your existing environment. For instance, what do you currently use for storage (i.e. speed and capacity)? And do you feel it still has life into it or is it time to retire it?

Storage tiering is a great way to optimize costs as it allows you to leverage data lifecycles. For instance, the bulk of what you keep on your NAS/SAN is unlikely to be used in the next hour or two, so why keep it on expensive specialized storage when you could store on commodity IT storage?

There are a few ways you can “tier” data. For instance, many storage vendors promote SSD RAID caching. While it is convenient (you don’t need to worry about anything) there are two potential issues with this approach. First, it is unlikely to work with your existing storage (you will likely have to forklift everything and are locked in). Second, and perhaps more important for video workflows, RAID caching is unpredictable because it operates at block level (i.e. the RAID controller has no concept of files, it only knows about blocks of data). It is therefore not possible to predict if a given file will be in the SSD when you need it. This mean it is virtually impossible to ensure there will never be drop-frames during playback.

Another “popular” approach consists in promoting the use of an “online” SSD volume separate from the “nearline” HHD volume. This approach puts the burden on the users to manually choose, which “projects” or “files” should be moved to the SSD volume (or out of it). This data movement leads to two problems: First, you will likely end up having to buy a fairly sizeable SSD volume because everyone will want to have their data on it; and second, you will be facing a bunch of broken links (requiring relinking in applications) each time a project is moved.

Tiger addresses both of these challenges through its Replication&Tiering module. This module presents a unified volume to the users and handles all data movement transparently between the primary (online) and secondary (nearline or archive) tiers of storage. This module is available with Tiger Box1 SSD (if you already have storage) as well as on the hybrid version of Tiger Box (combines SSD acceleration with spinning disks). In both cases, the result is a super fast system that delivers sustained performance exceeding 3GB/sec without having you to spend lots of money on SSD because the system ensures all the “hot” files are pushed in the primary tier and moves all aging data to the secondary one. The overall solution is much more cost effective and much more user friendly because users only need to deal with one volume. Opening a file or a project is all it takes to ensure it gets loaded into the primary tier. If the target is fast enough, there is no perceived delays at all. Users also have a visual indicator to see which files are in the primary tier or not. They have the confidence that the right data is always at the right place at the right time. Note that this Replication&Tiering module supports various replication targets (local RAID storage, NAS, Tape Libraries, Cloud Storage, etc.) so there is no more need to look up a MAM or archiving software to figure where your “old” content has been moved to. Just browse to your original folder and click on the project or file you want to automatically access it!

BTW I thought I would share this info because I think a lot of people are not aware such a workflow is possible; yet it is a great way to get amazing speeds at a very reasonable price.

Bernard Lamborelle
bernard at tiger-technology.com
http://www.tiger-technology.com
514-667-2015

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Hi Marty,

It would be useful to know what codec/bitrate you work with and what type of work you do (short form or long form)? Also, do you currently have any central file server/NAS to park your finished projects? If not, what is your backup/archive strategy – if any?

Cheers,

Bernard

Bernard Lamborelle
bernard at tiger-technology.com
http://www.tiger-technology.com
514-667-2015

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Hi Adam,

You might also want to consider projectStore basic that comes bundled with Tiger Store. It offers cost-effective Avid file system emulation. The compatibility is such that you can literally copy&paste your Avid ISIS to Tiger Store and keep editing. You will then have an upgrade path to projectStore PRO

Check both options out at: https://www.tiger-technology.com/products/project-series/

Let me know if you have any question or would like some evals.

Cheers,

Bernard.

Bernard Lamborelle
bernard at tiger-technology.com
http://www.tiger-technology.com
514-667-2015

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Thunderbolt supports One Initiator (your computer) to Multiple Targets (drives, printer, displays, etc.). What you are asking for is the ability to connect Multiple Initiators (computers) to One (or Multiple) Targets (drives). This is not possible with Thunderbolt technology. This is why everyone connecting to a SAN must go to either FC or 10GbE…

Hope this helps,

Bernard Lamborelle
bernard at tiger-technology.com
http://www.tiger-technology.com
514-667-2015

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Hi Ben,

Yes we do!

I’d suggest you contact Nick Warburton, at Global (our disti). He’ll be able to help locate someone local:

Global Distribution
Unit 7, Kings Court
Kirkwood Road
Cambridge, CB4 2PF
United Kingdom
Main line +44 (0) 1223 228 000 / 0870 464 0600
Technical +44 (0) 1223 228 030
Fax +44 (0) 1223 420 228 / 0870 464 0601

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Best,

Bernard

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Because FibreJet is a volume-level solution, you must manage lots of partitions and volumes. As a result, each file gets stored on a small partition, itself resting on just a few disks. Of course, the 2Gb pipe for your file server is also a bottleneck for your LAN clients.

Using a file-level based SAN like Xsan or metaSAN you could stripe-across all your partitions into a single logical unit. In this case, every file would end up being stored across all drives, which would significantly reduce seek times and improve responsiveness.

However, this in itself wouldn’t help with the file server. With Xsan, you would still need to rely on a “fat pipe” for your single file server in order so it can deliver good performance to your LAN clients. However, using metaSAN, you could either go the traditional server route or run metaLAN on your LAN clients. When using metaLAN, all your LAN clients would automatically “connect” to a grid made up of all your 10x SAN members (that would now behave as a unified cluster of server). This mean that your metaLAN clients would now have the equivalent of 20Gb access to the storage (10x 2Gb FC) and 10Gb access over Ethernet (10x 1GbE) instead of the current 2Gb FC on one side and 6x ports trunked on the other… And metaLAN doesn’t put a burden on your SAN workstations as the intelligent load balancing algorithm always tries to dispatch data through workstations that are less loaded.

As you can see, the infrastructure is only one aspect to consider. The other aspect is how data can be managed and distributed in the most efficient way.

But certainly going with a 4Gb connection to your storage over two ports will allow you to better take advantage of your trunked lines (zoning is recommended, but not required on Mac). Regarding your RAID question vs. slice configuration, I don’t think you will see a tremendous difference. In the end, you should have more speed with 16x drives in a RAID 5, just because you are only dedicating one drive to parity, instead of two. But this said, you might get more performance out of two controllers working in parallel instead of one… In reality, only someone who is intimately familiar with this exact model of Infortrend RAID would be able to tell for sure.

Bernard

Bernard Lamborelle
bernard at tiger-technology.com
http://www.tiger-technology.com
514-667-2015

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Hi Gavin,

Thousands of Tiger users have successfully integrated metaSAN and metaLAN in their facilities, so it can definitely be done.

While Fibre remains strong, we are increasingly seeing people wanting to take advantage of the 1GbE and 10GbE simplicity. They purchase a good Windows or Mac file server onto which they then install metaLAN Server (MSRP $595 USD). They connect clients over metaLAN (MSRP $295 USD each or a 20x seats pack for MSRP $2,950 USD). They use either 4-ports bonding or 10GbE (in this case, the bonding makes sense because it feeds multiple clients – and as David eluded to, a single process will not take advantage of bonding). Why metaLAN? First, because it helps overcoming the shortcomings of standard file server technologies that was designed for IT and not for video. So, instead of trying to get SMB or AFP to work right in a video environment, metaLAN works straight on the TCP/IP layer and offers performance that is comparable to iSCSI. With metaLAN, you also have the added benefit of block-level access; more stable and sustained throughput; bandwidth control; virtual volume creation as well as project-based management with Avid bin locking support. I personally believe that metaLAN is the best way to go for turning a regular Windows or Mac server into a souped-up, cross-platform server for Mac, PC and Linux video editing.

Certainly, depending on how technically savvy you are, you can save money by integrating your own solution. However, the amount of time and energy required for achieving adequate and reliable performance and for working out all the quirks is not predictable. In the end, you may end-up with lots of frustration and a half-baked solution. David nailed it right on the head by highlighting the most common issues you could run into… Matt is also right in terms of the lack of Infiniband penetration on the Mac market. Even on the PC side, it is not widely used in video environments (mostly used for IT). Isilon is all-proprietary; and this is why they can afford to use Inifiband.

For the above reasons, many resellers and end-users prefer a more integrated solution that works out-of-the-box and delivers predictable performances.

If you go Gb Ethernet, which is fine for low and moderate bit rates, then a simple NAS or file server optimized for video editing, such as the Small Tree Titanium, can do a great job for you (https://www.small-tree.com/GraniteSTOR_Shared_Storage_s/94.htm).

You can also benefit from metaLAN and metaSAN value-add in pre-configured solutions:

One such box (based on metaLAN technology), is available from Z Systems (https://shop.zsyst.com/Z-Systems-ZShare-16TB-ZShare-16TB.htm). This is a great solution for Gb Ethernet-based editing.

For Fibre-Channel connectivity, Sonnet offers the Vfibre (based on metaSAN technology): (https://www.sonnettech.com/news/pr2010/pr091010_fusionrx1600vfibre.html)

Finally, I believe that Tiger has just taken the NAS and SAN integration up another notch with the introduction a brand new shared-storage integrated appliance, called “Tbox” (https://www.tiger-technology.com/Tbox). Instead of integrating the standard metaSAN/metaLAN software into our own chassis, we have decided to develop new software specifically for Tbox. We believe Tbox currently offers the very best of NAS and SAN: it is competitively priced; there is no need for software licenses; you can have a mix of GbE, 10GbE and FC connections on the same chassis with 16, 32, 48 or 64TB of storage; it is designed to deliver superb performance; and it requires virtually no maintenance (web ui, greatly simplified admin, automatic configuration, auto-defrag during idle times, etc.). You can direct connect up to 16x clients to Tbox or add your own Gb or FC switch to extend to an unlimited number of clients (of course, the performance of the storage has its limits). Tbox also provides project-based management and Avid bin locking support, which makes it perfect for video editing…

Regards,

Bernard

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Agreed. Great guys and great products… I hate to say this, but I hope you’re wrong Bob!
Bernard

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Hi Ritesh,

Have you look into freeNAS?

For video editing, you could always give a try to metaLAN Server/metaLAN. This is our solution (I’m therefore biased). But this software turns a Windows server into a great cross-platform video SAN. It is easy to configure and you can request 30-days eval licenses to play with and see if it is worth it to you.

Instead of turning your workstation into a traditional file-server, metaLAN Server turns it into a shareable block-level server. Think of it as an iSCSI target with integrated arbitration logic. metaLAN Server uses the TCP/IP stack so performance is not dependant on SMB/CIFS/NFS or AFP protocols. Clients mount a local drive (not a network share). You can use 1GbE or 10Gbe; port binding; etc. You also benefit from a number of additional features such as bandwidth control to the individual clients. In addition to exposing your main volume that everyone can read/write, you can also use projectSTORE to create and manage virtual volumes. This is a great tool for use in a collaborative workflow or to work with Avid. It also integrates the cluStore technology that lets you dynamically expand the capacity of your server safely and easily (through unified namespace).

Bernard

[Bernard Lamborelle]

Hi Ritesh,

Sounds like what you are setting up is not a SAN, but a NAS. With a NAS you can share the storage via standard network protocols such as SMB/CIFS.

Using RAID 5 means you can lose one physical drive without losing data.
Using RAID 6 means you can lose two physical drive without losing data.

RAID 5 typically offers better performance than RAID 6.

In the end, it depends on how critical your setup is and if you have a backup procedure in place.

With regards to operating system, your only option should be RAID 1 for mirror.

Good luck,

Bernard