[Bob Zelin]

Hi Edan

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

Hi Glen –
the TVS-872XT has 2 PCIe slots. One is taken up by a thunderbolt 3 dual port card. The slot below this is empty.
You can add a QNAP QXG-10G1T ($89) or a dual port QNAP LAN-10G2T-X550 ($359) and have more 10G ports for direct connection. Of course, the correct thing to do – which would require spending a little more ($589) is to get a small 10G switch like the QNAP QSW-1208-8C. You plug the single Aquantia 10G port on the TVS-872XT into the
QNAP switch, and now you have seven computers that you can plug into the switch, all that can connect to the QNAP TVX-872XT (which by the way, is $1899 US).

For your Win 10 PC’s, you add the QNAP QXG-10G1T card into the PCIe slot. For your Thunderbolt 3 Mac, you connect a Sonnet Solo 10G thunderbolt to 10G adaptor. For a Thunderbolt 2 computer, you connect a Sonnet Twin 10G thunderbolt to 10G adaptor. No, you can’t get the cheaper Solo 10G to work on your thunderbolt 2 computer using an adaptor cable.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

well, I hope I did not upset you, Edan. I hope that I gave you accurate information.
What I observe, is that no matter what the “facts” are – many people feel that “theoretically, this should work”, which is often not the case. And when you present clinical evidence, they become upset (like trying to edit using thunderbolt 2 instead of 10G for multiple users).

How often have you gone to a physician, they prescribe a medicine, and it does not agree with you, or it does not work well ? Well – that physician has reps from drug companies that come into their office and say “use this, this works great for XYZ”. It comes from an accredited pharmaceutical company, so they try it. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. And of course, video and computers is no where as important as medicine.

My general observation, is that there are many wonderful companies out there. But pretty much everyone makes excellent stuff, and they make some “junk”. And in defense of some of the “junk” – this junk is not junk if it is used in the recommended manner by the manufacturer. A wonderful example of this is the Studio Network Solutions Prodigy, which is a tiny 4 bay NAS. SNS makes fantastic shared storage systems, like the EVO series, but the Prodigy is their tiny entry level product that works as intended if you listen to SNS. But I have seen users purchase a SNS Prodigy, hook it up to a 24 port 10G switch, and complain that they can’t get 24 people on iMacs to be able to playback without stuttering issues. Because THOSE PEOPLE want to get the cheapest thing possible from a manufacturer that they trust. And the reality is – the more expensive stuff can outperform the cheap entry level products.

And this certainly applies to QNAP. I see people get the cheapest QNAP with 10G port, the cheapest slow drives, the cheapest switch, and say “oh – this stuff is just garbage”. Well of course it is – you bought all the wrong equipment.
Because all that matters to you is that it’s the cheapest thing you can find – and now it doesn’t work, and you want to complain to someone that you spend “all this money” and it’s not working.

I see the same thing with people that own obsolete equipment, try to do a software update or firmware update, and it doesn’t perform as well as new equipment, even though their equipment is from 2004. What can I say.
Most manufacturers ignore people like this. I just like to yell at them. They deserve to have steam come out of their ears.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

I don’t understand the math, nor do I care (no offense).
I can tell you from practical experience. You get exactly what you said – about 1000 (1050 – whatever) – MB/sec with the better QNAP or Synology products with a 10G interface on your Mac or PC computer – if you are using (for example) a TVS-871T, TVS-872XT, TVS-1282T, TS-1677X, TS-1685. If you use one of the CHEAPER 8 bay boxes, like the TVS-873e, you don’t get this bandwidth. Specifically, if you do an 8 drive RAID 6 with a TVS-873e with QNAP QXG-10G1, you only get 500 MB/sec write, and 1000 MB/sec READ. The more expensive boxes with the same 10G card get 1000 MB/sec WRITE. If you are using a “good box” but with drives that only spin at 5400 RPM (WD RED) as opposed to 7200 RPM (WD RED Pro or Seagate Ironwolf drives) – THEN you get the 450 MB/sec Read and Write. I just did this with someone in Europe. I could not figure out why he was getting such slow speeds with the TVS-873e and the WD drives. I then looked up the model # and saw these were 5400 RPM drives (the WD RED, not the WD RED Pro, which are 7200 RPM).

This applies to every variable in the equation. If you have a “10G Network” and your network adaptor card or thunderbolt adaptor is based on an Intel X520, X540, X550 or Aquantia AQC-107, then you get this bandwidth.
But if your 10G adaptor is using a Tehuti 10G chip, then you get CRAPPY SLOW 10G speeds.

Different products have different performance. I see on the QNAP forums people crying about their slow 10G speeds when they buy the cheap QNAP boxes that have the Tehuti 10G chips, or the cheap Annapurna CPU, instead of the Intel or AMD Ryzen. Theory means nothing – all that matters is real world performance.
And the only way to find out is through clinical testing. I just install a lot of systems, and believe me – I make plenty of bad choices. That’s how I find out what does – and what does not – work.

If you want to achieve 1000 MB/sec Read/Write (900 MB/sec, whatever) – you use a “better box” (like the TVS-872XT which is currently $1899 with the 10G port) and 7200 RPM drives in a RAID 6 group, and you will get these speeds.
If you say “well – that doesn’t make sense – how come you can’t use a QNAP TS-831X 8 bay which is under $1000 with a 10G port, and get these same speeds” – I don’t know and I don’t care. It’s probably due to the Annapurna processor in these cheaper boxes.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

Before I start, I know using a RAID as an archive is dangerous and swapping out the drives even more so. This wasn’t my call and it’s a temporary solution and hopefully in the next few months a proper archive can be acquired.

REPLY – it wasn’t your call. If I was you, I would remind the person in charge that if this is the only copy of the footage or media, this is potentially very dangerous, and they could lose all their media.

Anyway I have a 12bay 120TB RAID that I need use a temporary archive. I have at least 40TB of assorted footage that’s scattered different across a bunch of 2TB shooting drives that need to be dumped and another 50TB on our server and other locations. Right off the bat I’m going to be nearly out of space with all this footage.

REPLY – you have just said “I’m going to be nearly out of space with all this footage”. SO – you can’t go a RAID 1, because 120 TB will be 60 TB with a mirror of the 60 TB. You can only do RAID 5 or RAID 6. With 12 drives, of course, you should do RAID 6, so you can have TWO drives fail before you lose all your data.

Would 2 RAID5 partitions make sense if I want to be able to be able to swap out half the drives in the RAID for fresh drives and put the old ones into cold storage? Or maybe 4 x RAID5 partitions so there’d only be 3 drives a partition and it would make it easer to swap a partition in case something needs to be recalled…

REPLY – this is completely insane. Every RAID 5 group you create, you lose the equivalent of one drive. So 6 drives in a RAID 5 is only 5 drives of space. If you create four RAID 5 groups, you lose the equivalent of four of your 10 TB drives. DO NOT swap out drives for a fresh RAID group. An empty RAID enclosure costs much less than the cost of the drives. If you can afford another 12 10TB drives, then you can definitely afford another RAID enclosure.
If you have TWO RAID enclosures – both with 12 10TB drives, and they are both RAID 6, then this is a perfectly suitable “archive” where you will be pretty safe.

Or because of the risk involved with this workflow does it make sense to go RAID1 for redundancy?

REPLY – RAID 1 is a mirror – you will lose 6 of your drives to the RAID 1 configuration, and if you make each group RAID 5, that 6 drive group will be only 5 drives of usable space (50 TB). Its a poor plan.

10TB drives cost $300 each (Seagate Ironwolf), so 12 drives cost $3600 dollars.

At the very least, if there is no budget, just do a RAID 6 and keep a spare drive on hand (I have no idea of what RAID host adaptor you are using – Highpoint, ATTO, Areca, etc).

The bottom line here, is that if you (or your boss) cheap’s out, and you lose all your data – it’s game over.
There is no film, no commercial, no show, no client left, and no payment for both you and your boss.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

. Should we move in the direction of NAS?
Or what are your thoughts on having an Airport Extreme as a router and connecting a WD Elements hard drive into that as a server? Will that work?

REPLY – it is sad for me to see what is happening to our industry.
I come from a time when a single Sony VTR was $50,000, and you had to have 3 of them, to do a dissolve (plus a switcher and an edit controller and an audio mixer). When AVID came out, it was about $80,000 – too much for many people. Over the years the prices have dropped.

Today, budget brands like QNAP and Synology exist, but it appears that even under $2000 plus the cost of SATA drives is way too much money for many users. This certainly applies to modern 10G switches, which used to range (and still cost by some companies) between $15,000 – $25,000, and today, you can get a 10G switch for $500 – $600 dollars. But again, this is still WAY too much money for many users.

So when I see your post – “can I use an Airport Extreme as a router and connect a WD Elements hard drive into that as a server – will that work” –
I am old and tired. I am getting tired of fighting, and being insulting.

I have many professional companies calling me, asking me to promote their shared storage system, and ask “why do you always promote QNAP” – well, it’s because QNAP is cheap – a fraction of the price of other products that cost many time that mount. But you see – no matter how cheap a QNAP is – the real answer is that many people want a solution that will cost $200 for a WiFi router, and plug a drive into it, and that is your shared storage.
What can I say. What can all the professional manufacturers say any more.

NO AJ Jasche. Do more jobs, save your money, get several thousand dollars together, and then you can have shared storage for 3 computers that will do exactly what you want.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

I can sit here and tell you details about the QNAPs, but the bottom line, is that you will ALWAYS run out of storage. Drives have a finite size. If you wind up getting a 4 bay QNAP, and set this up as RAID 5 with 10TB drives, this will give you 30 TB of usable storage. How long will 30 TB last you? You said that you are going to have 20+ external hard drives. Well – all of that adds up to a LOT of storage. You only have 1 – 2000 quid to spend on this.
QNAP and others offer many models, but the expense is the drives.

SO – let’s say that you could afford a 12 bay with 10TB drives. That is 100 TB of usable storage after RAID 6.
Guess what happens after you fill up all 100 TB. You have to buy MORE STORAGE. Just like the old days of videotape where there was always another Sony VTR that you had to buy – today’s game is storage. As the formats get bigger and bigger, and the file sizes get bigger and bigger, you constantly have to buy more storage.

Will all of this cost you more than 1000 – 2000 quid. You bet !

A modern larger QNAP will let you store lots of media, and edit right off the QNAP. Then you can use your existing 20 drives as the backup. Will this cost more money – yes !

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

you are correct Roy. The new Mac mini has four thunderbolt ports, 2 busses, and an optional Aquantia 10GbE port.
With that said, this gentleman is not going to get the performance he expects from one single SSD for a workgroup.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

Hi
I cannot find the Netgear GM110X switch, so I cannot identify which switch you are using.
this is the budget series of small Netgear 10G switches –
https://www.netgear.com/business/products/switches/unmanaged/XS505M.aspx

your Mac Mini is the server which is not a great server, but it will work. However, are you using a single SSD, or an SSD RAID. You cant have shared storage with a single SSD or SATA drive – you must have multiple drives in a RAID configuration for this to work.

As for your speeds, 10G max throughput is 1250MB/sec theoretical, and even with a properly setup system, with modern equipment, you are lucky to get 900 – 1000 MB/sec. So 700 MB/sec is great, and it can do 8K. Don’t rely on iPerf, as it only measures the network speeds. Use the utilities from AJA or Blackmagic for your speed tests.

The iMac Pro 10G port to any shared storage system that has a 10G port and eight drives in a RAID config will do
900 – 1000 MB/sec read and write speed. The Mac Mini has a single thunderbolt buss, that you will be sharing with your 10G port and your RAID array.

You have jumbo frames enabled which is correct. Make sure that you have disabled SMB signing.

Again – you can be doing “everything” correctly, but you are not going to get a shared storage system to work with only one single SSD drive.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com

[Bob Zelin]

upset me ? Why would you think that ☺

the TVS-873e is great. Instead of getting TWO 10G cards, get a single LAN-10G2T-X550 dual port 10G card.
Each can be assigned to each of your PC’s. And yes, if you are running Win 10, with at least x4 lane slots in the PC that are available for a NIC card, get the QNAP QXG-10G1T card. You will get the drivers to run this from the Aquantia website (this is the same chip that is used in the iMac Pro for 10G). It’s an $89 card.

As of mid January, I prefer the newer TVS-872TX, but it’s $1899 and the TVS-873e is cheaper. Make sure to get at least 8 gig of RAM, and not the 4 Gig model.

As for WD RED drives, MAKE SURE they are the WD RED Pro, as the Pro are 7200 RPM and the regular RED are 5400 RPM, which will make your TVS-873e only be able to do 450 MB/sec. And yes, you need ALL EIGHT DRIVES, and you need them now – day 1.

And you don’t need a switch.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com