Eric Hansen
Forum Replies Created
-
not off-topic at all.
Steve Modica can chime in with the technical explanations, but basically, OS X can’t benefit from link aggregation on the client side. it can only support a single connection to a server, in this case, your NAS.
doing a link agg from your NAS to your switch has benefits however, as it doubles the number of links available to outside clients using the same IP address (it doesn’t go faster, it just makes more connections available)
as far as seeing double the speed, and high bursts, I believe this is the OS sensing more than there really is. If you setup a RAID-1 in disk utility on 2 internal drives, and then copy a file to it and watch it in Activity Monitor, you will see a read speed of 80MB/s (for example) and 160MB/s write because the system is writing to the 2 drives in the RAID-1 and counting that as 2 streams. i think if you link agg on the client side, you will see a variation of this, and that’s why it still takes 1:41 to copy the file.
hopefully steve chimes in with a more technical answer
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
hey Stephen
Alex and Bob can definitely line you out with some great options, but i wanted to address your “90MB/s” comment.
this is a common thing i hear from my clients. the Drobo (or any other external device), may be able to do 90MB/s, and ProResHQ is 25-30MB/s, so that means i should be able to share to 3 edit systems editing ProResHQ, right?
NO
90MB/s is a single stream of continuous data where the individual drives aren’t being asked to access more than a single large file. if you have 3 computers, the system all of a sudden is asked to access 3 different files at the same time, causing the drives to search all over their platters for those 3 individual files. they will find them, but not with enough quickness to supply 90MB/s total, and certainly not in real-time.
this is where RAIDs with massive speeds come into play. you need a system that’s fast enough to access all this media, no matter where it’s scattered on the array, and then supply it to the clients fast enough to support real-time editing requirements on each workstation. Drobo can’t do this. it has a very high overhead for its complex proprietary RAID scheme. it’s a storage and archive appliance. not a working volume. even the smallest shared storage systems i build have a burst rate of 600MB/s to handle just a few clients. but even storage with fast burst rates aren’t enough. many of the vendors here spend a lot of R&D time tweaking drivers and firmware to increase the number of real-time streams supported, even if this means dropping the burst rate.
so no, a Drobo can’t handle this use because that’s not what it’s designed for.
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
another option, which is what i’m about to do with an Xsan client, is merge this system with an ethernet system. you already have your 3rd Xserve running as an AFP share. put in a 6port 1Gb card, or a 10Gb card with a new switch, and share that along side a new ethernet based system. i believe both slots on the Xserve are 16x. can someone correct me if i’m wrong? then the OS X version you’re running on the Xsan is no longer an issue, since all the clients are AFP. then put your money into the new system. this is what i would do. if you want to stick with fibre, go with Active storage. you won’t be disappointed.
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
good to hear, thanks Nick!
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
hey Craig
Option 1 doesn’t add anything. I assume that the Xserves are running fine. Switching to Mac Minis is not advised as you’re just replacing an old Accord with a new Camry.
I assume there’s a fibre switch in here somewhere
with 2 and 3, are you scrapping all of your existing Xserve hardware? i’ve never used the Active or StorNEXT products, so someone else will have better advice than me.
4. if you’re talking about editing, then you need AVID on an ISIS. no other NLEs allow project sharing. if you’re talking about just media and not project files, any shared system will allow you to do that.
btw, Xserve RAIDs are slow. i believe 100-150MB/channel? someone will have to correct me on that. if speed is your need, then all new storage and switches will be required. and new HBAs on the client side.
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
None of my clients have complained about the noise. I don’t have one in my home system, but I’m installing one for a client on Tuesday. I’ll let you know what I find.
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
i think CalDigit told me that RAID Shield wouldn’t work with drives that didn’t have their firmware. but if everything’s working for you, awesome. that’s a big money saver and takes CalDigit out of the bottleneck.
my go-to drives have always been Hitachi Ultrastars and Western Digital Caviar Blacks. i looked up your drives, and they’re part of WD’s RE series of enterprise drives, which is confusing because i thought Blacks were their enterprise drives. even pictures of the RE’s show them with black stickers. WD’s website has moved Blacks to their Desktop series and they’re not recommended for RAIDs. this doesn’t affect your situation, but i’m personally confused.
reminds me of when Hitachi’s awesome Saturns were replaced with their middle of the road Jupiters and it confused me then too.
both of those drives you listed are solid and exactly what you want. WD only lists one model of the 6Gbps SATA RE on their site, so my only guess is they’re the same drive from 2 different batches.
https://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=30
hopefully there’s still some Cyber Monday deals you can get
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
yes. that will give you the best performance bang for your buck
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
what Sebastien laid out, plus a switch, is the cheapest way to do Xsan from a hardware standpoint. it’s many times more expensive than what i described using ethernet. yes, the Xsan method will make each computer connection faster, but if you’re just editing and 1Gb is enough, than Xsan isn’t worth the money.
but from an administrator’s standpoint, let me just throw in my 2 cents. the main reason i got out of Xsan is the lack of support for an independent guy such as myself, working in the middle of nowhere. even getting Apple Xsan certification was a waste as it didn’t get me any closer to getting assistance from the Apple mothership. the forums were of next to no help, because they were geared toward pros that were VERY high end. Xsanity just confuses me. and the number of people on there is much less than it used to be. back when i started, Apple even had an Xsan service plan that cost $1000 per computer per year (so for my first self-installed Xsan, that was $5000 a year). before i paid a cent of that, i called them up with an issue and even at their highest level of support that they offered, they were clueless as to how to fix the problem. that’s why they EOLed the Xserve and the Xserve RAID. This is why Xsan is now included for free. Apple makes more money washing their hands of it, than they do selling it with a service plan. if you go the Xsan route, just make sure you have an excellent integrator working with you, and will be available for support when you need.
and yes, they will charge handsomely for it. you say hardware will be the most expensive, but for an Xsan installation, I would budget a few grand for an integrator’s assistance on even the smallest of systems. i had plenty of offers from techs to pay their expenses to fly out to Jackson Hole to go skiing with me and fix my Xsan, but it was cheaper to go ethernet, and i can sleep better at night knowing that DNS won’t knock out my ethernet SAN.
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv -
Xsan is a shared and actively managed filesystem and requires Metadata Controllers, not just a switch. the suggested Mac Minis and SANLinks will run about $2000-3000, plus the cost of the switch and FC cards for each computer.
if you stick with ethernet, you will “gain” simplicity. FC is great, but I think it’s overkill for your use.
If this was my personal setup, even though I have Xsan experience, i would stick with ethernet.
e
Eric Hansen
Production Workflow Designer / Consultant / Colorist / DIT
https://www.erichansen.tv