[Matt Geier]

Hi Morten,

Thanks for your posting.

Bob is correct, you need more hardware to do what you want to. You need to have the dedicated server. The reason you want this, is to play the role of managing the client connections and the storage files. Your server IS the point of access in cases of the clients connected to it…If you get into an Intel Mac (Quad Core or better—) it will come with TWO Ethernet ports.

If you only have just the two workstations, you can certainly suffice doing a direct connect to the server — giving each one their own link (which is what you want…) — in the future, if you need more connections, invest in a Multi Port Card to install at the server, and voila! More Connections!

Here’s some other answers to your questions …

—–
1. Can I set up the old G5 as a fileserver, and connect through fast (link-aggregated) Gigabit ethernet?
—–

You can use a G5, there are lots doing it, however, under a Pro Res environment, you may find that this starts to bog down under pressure. G5’s are Power PC systems, and therefore they are not near as good as an Intel Mac, but they can still hold up to some extent.
(certainly not recommended to run anything less then a Quad Core Intel MacPro or XServe though….)

—–
2. Should I retire X-Raid and invest in Apace Systems storage, or is 10gigabit ethernet soon on its way?
—–

Okay, there are two things to this I see ..

First, a Storage question, if you’re looking for the recommendation, I’m sure someone will advise. I do not really know if either of these will be able to keep up with Pro Res the way you need it to…
(I’m making reference to more then just Bandwidth BTW….please be aware that it one of several performance measurements to be weary of…)

Second, 10Gb for Mac has been around for a LONG TIME. There’s a company called Small Tree that has been bringing 10Gb Ethernet products to Mac since November 2005 when they released Intel’s 10Gb PCI X driver with hardware for XServe.

https://www.small-tree.com/Articles.asp?id=151

If you really want to be hooked up, you can implement CAT6a, and you’ll be ready for 10Gb. (this exists today, more in point to point applications right now …) — Fibre Channel over Ethernet is also coming (FCoE), and will be here creeping into people’s environments in late 2010 early 2011.

Today, Small Tree brings Intel’s entire Pro1000 and Pro10Gbe Line to the Mac market place…..

—–
3. Should I equip new MacPro with Fibrechannel, and setup a SAN with software like Tiger Technology?
—–

You don’t need ANY of this to be honest …. You can do what you want with just getting the hardware you need and setting up the network properly etc …

Hope this helps you.

[Matt Geier]

Nitin

The way Apple’s AFP is designed, is a “single socket protocol” — meaning that it will only ever open one outbound connection. If on another hand, you have multiple network connections coming into a Mac, then yes, likely link aggregation (port binding) would work better to balance whatever traffic.

From where you are going though, unless you have an application that is mutli threaded (opening more then one thread, which can also be run down more then one open network connection..) or unless you have a heavy incoming load of bandwidth over a single connection, you’re not going to see much benefit.

[Matt Geier]

Bob,

You make a good point. It would be better to say that we are BOTH right, if things are done properly.

Managed Switches are very capable of supporting multiple networks, if configured to do so correctly..

In any event, running one network on a Managed Gigabit Switch, while running a second slower or less strenuous network on some other unmanaged switch may be okay….

In some cases the most “simplistic” way would be ONE switch, not TWO. Regardless of how many networks are in a facility, there are a lot of cases where one or two Managed Switches will run Multiple Networks. – Even in a video editing environment…

All of this assumes that the entire network / and hardware configuration being setup is correctly done in either case.

[Matt Geier]

Marvin,

Small Tree switches are able to support 10/100 networks, however, Small Tree doesn’t do a lot of testing on 10/100 since the focus is Gigabit and 10Gb Ethernet networking.

https://www.small-tree.com/Edge_corE_28_port_L2_Managed_Gigabit_Ethernet_Stan_p/es4528v.htm

Hopefully this helps you.

Matt G

[Matt Geier]

Hey —

Thanks for clearing that all up!

I checked and OpenVPN doesn’t have a OSX download for Server. It’s only a Client VPN OSX download that I’m using.

I guess we have OpenVPN installed on our firewall, and that’s what allows us access to the Apple’s once inside our network.

Bob – Not sure how that differs from what you want to do?

Thanks all — just doing my part to try and help out 🙂

Matt

[Matt Geier]

Chris,

Sounds bad.

Have you tried calling Rorke for support? Playing around with failed RAIDS can be a chore if you don’t know what’s going on.

The best thing for you to do is get a Rorke expert, or technician to help you.

[Matt Geier]

Bob,

You may want to try using Open VPN. https://www.openvpn.net/

We have that here in our office, use it to connect to Mac and Windows systems.

It’s very easy to configure on the client, and I’m sure the implementation on the server is fairly simple as well.

[Matt Geier]

Iain,

Looks like Ebay is popping up some auctions for FCP6.

https://shop.ebay.com/?_from=R40&_trksid=p3907.m38.l1313&_nkw=Final+Cut+6&_sacat=See-All-Categories

[Matt Geier]

Edward,

Thanks for posting.

iSCSI is interesting and can be extremely confusing when it’s misbehaving or in operation. So really what you are describing could be a problem related with about, well, anything in the configuration.

It’s more simply put for you and I, a complicated Ethernet networking protocol. –

I would suggest “trying” to locate someone that perhaps has knowledge about the hardware and the iSCSI initiator you have. Here’s a good place to start looking for where to go…..Either you’ll find some answers or possibilities that lead you on a path further down the road to resolution.

See what online forums hold about your equipment specific..(search Google)
Investigate any other iSCSI forums etc..(Search Google again..)

For a list of people that may have resources to help:
Check under “Industry Support” — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISCSI

Good luck – I hope you can attract the attention here of someone who has experience with iSCSI at a technical level. I hope I have provided some info for you that helps you succeed.

Regards,

Matt G

[Matt Geier]

Neil,

No, not a typo, – the point was that passing 5 streams of HD in real time, is more requirment then passing 5 streams of pro res in real time, and less overhead on the wire.

To better understand the bandwidth requirements use this below to do the comparison of Uncompressed HD bandwidth vs Pro Res HQ bandwidth / RAID Requirements

Pro Res HQ x 1 Streams = 35MB bandwidth (compression varies)
Uncompressed HD x 1 stream = 150-250MB bandwidth

Not only are the Ethernet requirements less constrained for Pro Res HQ vs Uncompressed HD, but also The RAID requirements are less constrained for Pro Res as Uncompressed HD.

Both can be done on an Ethernet SAS/SATA solution or all Fiber Channel solution, or both, in a mixed environment. As long as the hardware supports the requirements properly (not only bandwidth but also how fast the solution is) both protocols can work very well.

Does that make more sense?