Jeremy Strootman
Forum Replies Created
-
Hi Dustin,
Shoot me an email and I will get some numbers over to you for comparison. We can talk a little bit about Avid workflow as well.
jstrootman@studionetworksolutions.com
Thank you,
Jeremy Strootman
Studio Network Solutions -
Hi Jonathan,
EVO is a good fit. Then again, I am partial to it. As you stated, the Apple server in front of Promise storage will most likely not meet the performance requirements. Furthermore, there is little to be said about the Apple Server (MacPro Tower?) possessing any server features. There are no redundant power supplies or high availability fault-tolerance. The Promise storage, of course, possesses some of these features.
Another interesting point is the 10Gig option seems like an odd suggestion too. 3 streams of ProRes HQ comes to around 90-100MB/s. Why do you need a 1000MB/s pipe to fit that in? What do you do with the other 900MB/s?
With EVO, you can connect 1Gig or 10Gig Ethernet, or fibre. You will get over 100MB/s on the Ethernet pipe easily handling 3 streams of ProRes HQ. Therefore, I would not recommend our 10Gig option. Fibre is nice if you want it. Although, you can always add fibre to EVO later on down the road if you decide that you would like it. It is very inexpensive to throw an extra port on to EVO.
Come by the booth at NAB.
Jeremy
-
Martin,
Check out Cache-A. They make tape based archive solutions that deploy over a network. So, you can manage them from anywhere in the building. They have everything from small single tape at a time solutions to entire libraries with all the robotics.
https://www.cache-a.com/index.php
Good luck,
Jeremy
-
John,
I think the more concerning issue with the solution you are proposing is the cost of all of the components and the level of fault tolerance you are getting for that money.
It looks like you have budget for a real SAN solution from a single source vendor that would be easier to support from an IT standpoint, as opposed to the DYI solution you are presenting.
Ethernet will work wonderfully with the iSCSI protocol. I (along with some of my peers) have solutions that take Ethernet out of the workstations directly to Ethernet based storage. There is no need to convert topologies on the way down the pipe via a Mac Pro.
You might want to get some quotes for real SAN solutions.
-
Klaas,
If you would like some more information regarding traditional SAN solutions (software, hardware, etc) I can help. Bob is right about TCP/IP protocols and file sharing. The different hardware/drivers make a difference.
The other thing you can do is use iSCSI as a protocol. That way you will be able to get 90+MB/sec on any workstation. Then you can find a software target (not very cohesive) or a hardware target. Our hardware targets have both fibre and iSCSI. Therefore, you can work in SD/ProRes today and switch to uncompressed HD and 2K via fibre without having to reconfigure anything on the SAN in the future.
Block level access provides the most reliability at the fastest speeds. Save project files to a volume with read/write permissions, and any user can access any project file and media at any time. We provide iSCSI, TCP/IP, fibre channel and 10Gig in one box.
Jeremy
A set up like that should run around $15-18K all in.
-
Matt,
Your head is in the right spot on this one. I think Xsan is overkill for this environment. Final Cut Server might be as well. You might consider a mixed server/storage solution that provides connectivity for both of the client requirements you are presenting. First, you can provide SAN access to the 2 Final Cut workstations either over iSCSI or fibre. Either way, block level is the best performing, most scalable and it is fairly cost effective. Both workstations will be able to edit with the same assets and share project files. Second, you can create a file share on the same storage for the office/LAN clients that you would like to access clips for review or approval, etc… This way the editors can keep their material isolated from the LAN, but still present what they need to, when they need to. For a setup like that, you are looking at a pretty reasonable price tag. I have references at some of the organizations that you are already working with as well.
In terms of asset management. I think CatDV might be an easier solution to implement given the setup. I think you will find more support right out of the box vs. the customization that goes in to Final Cut Server. If you would like to find out more about that, I can put you in touch with some friends that represent that solution as well. Hop over to the CatDV forum on the Cow too.
Jeremy Strootman
jstrootman@studionetworksolutions.com -
There are definitely many ways of accomplishing what you want to do here. Furthermore, you want to think about what you are doing today and what you might be doing tomorrow. So, you have already identified that you do not want anything that requires the support of a full time IT employee. With that said, the approach of acquiring 3rd party components and putting together your own SAN is probably not the approach you would like to take. Therefore, you might look in to a turnkey solution that comes packed with all of the components you will need. Turnkey solutions providers make solutions that are easy to manage, reducing the need for IT support. They can also support your entire network infrastructure, in stead of, a component here or a part over there.
Things that should be included in a turnkey SAN solution:
– Connectivity (fibre, ethernet or both)
– Storage
– Software to manage user reads and writes
– Install, Training and SupportAnd last, I have a customer base of thousands that are successfully using SAN solutions with no IT staff and realize a return on the investment daily. Shoot me a call in you would like to discuss this further.
800-325-1307 ext 220
Jeremy
-
Hi Josh,
I have been working with Robert on this for quite some time. Shoot me a call and I can fill you in on some of the things that we have been discussing.
Jeremy Strootman
Studio Network Solutions
314-733-0551 ext. 220