[Neil Sadwelkar]

I just came across this old thread, and thought I’d pipe in with realistic costs for cloud storage. I had done a comparative study for a client who eventually went with cloud storage for smaller project files and ProRes masters, but left raw files for a cloned disk system.

Cloud storage plans are usually in $ per GB per month and are deceptively low when one sees them expressed in those units. Like fractions of cents. But the real cost quickly adds up when that data is kept backed up for long periods. And there is a steep cost of getting that data back too.

Between Backblaze, Amazon S3, Microsoft Azure and Google cloud, I found the costs to upload and store to be about $5 to $ 26 per TB per month. the download cost is between $ 50 to $ 80 per TB per month. Once you take about 10 TB into consideration and, say, 2 years of storage then restore, the cost balloons into tens of thousands of dollars. Way more than what a second nearline storage off-site, or LTOs stored off-site would cost.

Then there’s the time to upload/download. At speeds 100 Mbps and under, the time to upload and download, say, 10 TB, ranges from 10 days (for 100 Mbps) to 3 months (for 10 Mbps)! And, obviously, 100 TB is exactly 10 times that.

So, as Bob has written, cloud storage for pro video files – not yet.
We’ll get there when we all have 40 Gbps Internet easily available.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

With a Samsung T3 SSD of 2 TB running $ 750 or so, its like carrying a RAID of yesteryear in your pocket. 2 Tb can hold over 100 hrs of ProRes Proxy (or DNxHD36) so you could have down-converted rushes of an entire feature or feature length docu, in a tiny package which has the speed (300+ MB/sec) of a 4-bay RAID. And FCP X lets you store everything in one convenient library.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

Actually, not quite. I’ve found that is sequences use newer features and/or effects not present in older versions, then opening a bin from a very new version (like 8.x) in a very old version (like 6.x) can cause unpredictable results, ‘Assertion failed’, or sequences simply don’t open.

It’s probably rare to never, that one needs to open a project worked on in a newer MC in an older MC, but still bin compatibility isn’t universal any more.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

[Bob Zelin] “please don’t think of this as a “cheap system” that can just do 4 systems.”

No I’m not thinking of cost. Cost is no object, if the speed and reliability are good. I was attracted by the 8-bay shareable over 10GigE for a more portable setup when one is offloading Alexa or Red video cards from multiple cameras using multiple workstations.

If I could connect even two MacBook Pros using 10GigE (with TBolt2-10GigE or Tbolt3-10GigE for the Touchbar MBP) to a 8-bay NAS RAIDs and get close to 250-300 MB/sec per client, I would be happy.

For 4 clients I guess I’ll need a switch unless there’s a NAS with 4 10GigE ports. But then, 4 10GigE clients on an 8-bay NAS would probably not be bale to deliver over 250-300 MB/sec per client.

My issue with the 16-bay is weight not cost. I’m guessing the 16 bay would be close to 30-40 kgs. An 8-bay is about 12-15 kgs which is manageable for one human.

The 8-bay one seems small enough to carry on set, but I got intrigued by Oliver mentioning a sub $1000 NAS unit which also does 10GigE. I could only find the QNAP TS-831X on B&H which is sub $1000 and even that has 2 SFP+ 10GigE ports.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

[Oliver Peters] “6 computers connected via a switch to the QNAP. The 4 edit stations are connected as 10GigE. “

So the Qnap connects to a switch via a single 10GigE, and the 10GigE switch has 4 Macs connecting to it over 10GigE each. Why kind of bandwidth does each Mac get off the Qnap when all 4 clients are drawing data? Like do you have numbers if all 4 were to fire up BM Speed test or Aja speed test with the Qnap as target drive.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

I just came across this page at Yoyotta’s site which bears what Tim said about speed and LTO-7 drives…

https://yoyotta.com/help/installRocketStor.html

To quote…

“The RocketStor does not support the TLR protocol so it is not compatible with the higher speed of LTO-7 drives
If using an LTO-5 or LTO-6 library use firmware v1.8.1.0 as newer firmware v1.8.8.0 will not format and mount tapes.
There are other models like the 6328L, which will not work with LTO drives.”

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

Strangely enough, in India the price differential is not as much.
An LTO-6 tape is now Rs 2,700. While an LTO-7 tape is Rs 8,200.
Since I use Bru which writes 2.2 TB to LTO-6 and (may) write 5.3 TB to a LTO-7 tape, here in India, its Rs 1227 per TB for LTO-6 vs Rs 1,547 per TB for LTO-7.
LTO-5 at the moment is Rs 1,380 per TB, so its actually costlier than LTO-6.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

This has been the pattern for years now. From the 3 to 4 and 4 to 5, and 5 to 6 transition period. When the product is new it commands a premium price. Over time it reduces but so does the lower capacity tape. And eventually the per TB cost of both get near the same.

So, go and get the LTO-7 if the ability to hold 6 TB on a tape is of any use to you. Else, 2.5 TB per tape is fine.

Interestingly, and this has a bearing on per TB costs, LTO generations have always doubled capacities. Except LTO-6 which came in at 2.5 TB over 1.5 TB of LTO-5.

I think the ‘sweet spot’ for buying an LTO-7 drive will be the second half of this year when prices will level out.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

Has this issue been resolved. The speed, or lack of it, I mean, on a Mac with Atto HBAs

I’m about to place money on a Tandberg LTO-7 drive along with an Atto ThunderLink SH 2068 TB2-SAS adapter, (which is suspect is internally an H680). Mainly for its size as this will be a ‘travelling’ setup.
But, since I expect to be backing up Thunderbolt or USB3 RAIDs, a speed cap of 230 MB/sec would be a disadvantage.

Which comparable Highpoint HBA would be a better choice? How about a Rocketstor 6328 or 6328L/6324L since I don’t really need the RAID capabilities while driving an LTO-7 drive.

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India

[Neil Sadwelkar]

The iStar HDD cage that’s mentioned by Tim is not an external device. It goes inside a PC cabinet and needs an SMPS to power it. and it uses 3.5″ drives.

For 2.5″ drives you could consider a 2.5″ RAID case from Akitio which has removable 2.5″ drives.
Like this one
Akitio Thunder2 Quad Mini
https://www.amazon.com/Akitio-TBQM-TIAA-AKTU-Thunder2-Quad-Mini/dp/B00VJ4IWVU/ref=sr_1_3?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1487849110&sr=1-3&keywords=akitio

It has no RAID capabilities, however.

There’s the Promise Pegasus M4 which is tiny and supports 2.5″ SSDs and drives.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1046491-REG/promise_technology_p2m4hd4us_promise_pegasus2_4x1tb_t_bolt2.html

———————————–
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India