+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 52
How do you do....it? Thread, nas server setup in Technical; Originally Posted by dhicks I thought the whole idea behind RAID was that the disks were inexpensive ? I figure ...
  1. #31
    DMcCoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Isle of Wight
    Posts
    3,421
    Thank Post
    10
    Thanked 486 Times in 426 Posts
    Rep Power
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    I thought the whole idea behind RAID was that the disks were inexpensive? I figure that means simply buying the fastest drives you can get for the minimum amount of money. If a drive goes - still a relatively rare occurrence, even for drives without top-rated MTBF figures - it's just a case of swapping in a spare and waiting for the array to rebuild. This might slow performance for a few hours, but I figure that's acceptable in most schools.

    --
    David Hicks
    RAID controllers are quite happy to mirror corruption, the name has never really been relevant, especially when it was only scsi disks!

    If you do not also have a full and recent backup then you should get the most reliable disks you can to reduce the chance of multiple disk failures. You might even want a hot spare.

    RAID is more for uptime than anything else, it's certainly not a backup method

  2. #32

    dhicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Knightsbridge
    Posts
    5,611
    Thank Post
    1,226
    Thanked 772 Times in 670 Posts
    Rep Power
    234
    Quote Originally Posted by DMcCoy View Post
    RAID controllers are quite happy to mirror corruption
    Isn't that the job of the RAID controller or file system to take care of, though?

    I figure all disks are going to fail eventually, so might as well go with the hot-spare option. I understand about RAID by itself not being a backup strategy, though - accidentally delete a file from a RAID array and it's still deleted!

    --
    David Hicks

  3. #33

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,986
    Thank Post
    850
    Thanked 2,653 Times in 2,253 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    I thought the whole idea behind RAID was that the disks were inexpensive? I figure that means simply buying the fastest drives you can get for the minimum amount of money. If a drive goes - still a relatively rare occurrence, even for drives without top-rated MTBF figures - it's just a case of swapping in a spare and waiting for the array to rebuild. This might slow performance for a few hours, but I figure that's acceptable in most schools.

    --
    David Hicks
    Yes the meaning of the 'I' is still contested between inexpensive and independent unfortunately. The RAID edition disks that DMcCoy is referring to are simply designed better for use in a server platform, they are designed to be run constantly and have a much longer rated lifespan when compared to standard desktop drives. These are less likely to fail from shear mechanical use than consumer drives and the firmware on them is more rigorously checked, sometimes even upgraded unlike consumer drives.

    There was an issue a while back with some of the 700gb consumer Seagate drives. Revision A(or B can't remember) which used the firmware from server grade drives was really quick and the drive became sought after. The newer drives Rev C I think came out with different firmware and were a lot slower than the originals. This to the best of my knowledge was never fixed on those Rev C drives. If these were server drives then this would most probably have been sorted by a firmware upgrade or more likely the drives would not have been released with that flaw.

    You can run consumer grade disks in a RAID system but it depends on the goals you have for your system if this is the right approach. If your goal is a high avalibility drive that runs as fast and is as reliable as possible then you will want to spend the little bit extra and get server rated drives. If you want a large storage space that goes quite quickly but may need disks replacing more often you can use consumer disks, overall though the sever grade ones are more likely to handle heavy loads gracefully.

    The last time I checked with my suppliers the premium for the Seagate server grade SATA drives was along the lines of $70(GBP 27) on $700(GBP 270) drives so it may be worth checking the difference with your suppliers.
    Last edited by SYNACK; 6th April 2008 at 10:10 PM.

  4. #34
    DMcCoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Isle of Wight
    Posts
    3,421
    Thank Post
    10
    Thanked 486 Times in 426 Posts
    Rep Power
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    Isn't that the job of the RAID controller or file system to take care of, though?

    I figure all disks are going to fail eventually, so might as well go with the hot-spare option. I understand about RAID by itself not being a backup strategy, though - accidentally delete a file from a RAID array and it's still deleted!

    --
    David Hicks
    It is, yes. I've had less problem with raid 5, but I've seen a raid 1 setup take out both drives in the past. It's better now as with smart monitoring things like reallocated sector count. The backup bit was more a general comment about RAID's failings rather than suggesting you or anyone else thought of it as backup

    The highest risk will be during a resync when the disks are under higher load, and temperatures etc.

    Cheap disks can be used if you wish, it's just that reliability can still be an additional factor sometimes even with RAID.

  5. #35
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by DMcCoy View Post
    RAID controllers are quite happy to mirror corruption, the name has never really been relevant, especially when it was only scsi disks!

    If you do not also have a full and recent backup then you should get the most reliable disks you can to reduce the chance of multiple disk failures. You might even want a hot spare.

    RAID is more for uptime than anything else, it's certainly not a backup method
    Absolutely right. Although i would go so far as to say a hot spare in a raid 5 setup should be seen as a necessity. Simply becuase of a risk of a second drive failure during a potentially lengthy rebuild process from a first disk failure. Raid 6 has the double parity insurance but hardly anyone is using raid 6 other than storevault/netapp customers because of the performance penalty. And netapp customers will have atleast one hot spare per shelf even with raid 6 - they're a cautious bunch storage admins. And they'll spend the dough on the tape and disk products for that peace of mind.

    @dhicks - unfortuantely theres' not a lot of info on best practice for networked video....plenty of info on sql, exchange and general nfs/cifs file sharing. The only thing to do is look at the best practice for storage of large files for presentation over cifs/nfs.

    For any premiere or final cut pro type networked video you'll need as fast a connection to clients as possible, adapter bonding on NAS or NAS head such as x86 server, and loads of spindles in a RAID group optimised for performance. So that is RAID 10 or similar, yes it's wasteful of disks but SATA drives and SAS are good valie, no need to look beyond SATA or perefrably SAS in terms of disk performance requirements for such a solution.

  6. #36

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,986
    Thank Post
    850
    Thanked 2,653 Times in 2,253 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    764
    Further my last post...

    I just looked up my quotes from then, the Seagate server graded stuff is branded ES and back in last November I could get 1TB Seagate Barracuda ES 7200.2, 32MB, SATAII drives for $515 each when the comparative desktop drives were around $470

  7. #37
    PeterW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Portsmouth
    Posts
    747
    Thank Post
    42
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts
    Rep Power
    31
    Damn - from reading the Wikipedia entry on NCQ you get the impression it comes as standard on all SATA drives.
    Some models from Old Maxtor, Samsung & Western Digital all have NCQ.

    I have a 3 year old 200GB Maxtor at home with NCQ.

  8. #38

    dhicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Knightsbridge
    Posts
    5,611
    Thank Post
    1,226
    Thanked 772 Times in 670 Posts
    Rep Power
    234
    Quote Originally Posted by torledo View Post
    For any premiere or final cut pro type networked video you'll need as fast a connection to clients as possible, adapter bonding on NAS or NAS head such as x86 server, and loads of spindles in a RAID group optimised for performance.
    "Loads of spindles"... Hmm... Right, so the original post was talking about a NAS server for (we think) video files - we all agree that's going to need a hefty bit of kit. Unless... would the best way to get the "loads of spindles" part be to create a distributed file system across the workstations? Assume each workstation has gigabit ethernet, we have a decent switch to connect them all together, and that all the workstations are on during the day when they are being used. Could we, say, partition the harddrive of each workstation and share half of it out to a central pool of some kind? Maybe two Samaba shares per workstation, linked by a central server, with duplication of shares between different workstations for redundancy? Or set each machine up as an iSCISI (or AoE) server, have each one export a couple of partitions as block devices available to a central SAN device of some kind?

    --
    David Hicks

  9. #39
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    "Loads of spindles"... Hmm... Right, so the original post was talking about a NAS server for (we think) video files - we all agree that's going to need a hefty bit of kit. Unless... would the best way to get the "loads of spindles" part be to create a distributed file system across the workstations? Assume each workstation has gigabit ethernet, we have a decent switch to connect them all together, and that all the workstations are on during the day when they are being used. Could we, say, partition the harddrive of each workstation and share half of it out to a central pool of some kind? Maybe two Samaba shares per workstation, linked by a central server, with duplication of shares between different workstations for redundancy? Or set each machine up as an iSCISI (or AoE) server, have each one export a couple of partitions as block devices available to a central SAN device of some kind?

    --
    David Hicks
    Easiest thing todo would be to have a 12 disk NAS appliance or 12 to 16 disk external SAS shelf connecting to the NAS server. The only kind of distributed workload i personally would contemplate implementing is something like qmaster on the mac which effectively uses the cpu of multiple machines working in the background to reduce completion times for large DVD authoring projects. But that's more additional cpu rather than more storage requirement. Don't know if there's a similar grid-esque method for use with premiere to reduce render times....but again that wouldn't solve solve the storage size and perfomance issues, for that i'd recommend a big array - less hassle, and you've got a centralized pool of storage. Alternatively you're stuck with working locally.

    If you've got a big fast central array...whether it be iscsi, NAS or fc san, you wouldn't need to bother with having the clients connect via a block protocol like iscsi - although performance wise it would probably be the best method. Conencting that many clients to a single array obviously brings up access issues because we're talking about a block storage access protocol.

    However if the clients connected via cifs to the NAS or to a NAS head, you could carve up a single raid group and a single volume for all clients to access and work from. Security would be a breeze to setup through ACL's inherent in the file access protocols.

    I just don't think 4 disks would cut it....it doesn;t matter how fast the connection to the NAS or NAS head is whether it be 10gbps or 4x1gps bonded, the critical performance bottleneck would be those 4 7200rpm spindles.....that's if they wanted to work from project files directly from the NAS/NAS head.
    Last edited by torledo; 7th April 2008 at 10:22 AM.

  10. #40
    PEO
    PEO is offline
    PEO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,093
    Thank Post
    457
    Thanked 150 Times in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    71
    mmmm now im a little confused of what i should do about video storage for premier.

    Should i go for local storage. install a sep SATA hd?

    the big problem i have at the moment is Im getting low on storage space, on the domain controller. 5Gb left to be exact. I figured a nas server would be ideal for holding thouse big powerpoint, pluss im going to be installing premier and thought nas would be the most cost effective solution. If i was to use nas for this, would i experience poor network performance?

  11. #41
    PEO
    PEO is offline
    PEO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,093
    Thank Post
    457
    Thanked 150 Times in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    71
    also does freenas support ntfs. I would need set permissions for each user folder

  12. #42
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by MrHappy View Post
    mmmm now im a little confused of what i should do about video storage for premier.

    Should i go for local storage. install a sep SATA hd?

    the big problem i have at the moment is Im getting low on storage space, on the domain controller. 5Gb left to be exact. I figured a nas server would be ideal for holding thouse big powerpoint, pluss im going to be installing premier and thought nas would be the most cost effective solution. If i was to use nas for this, would i experience poor network performance?
    Storage of premier files shouldn't be an issue on the nas with 500gb+ of usable storage. Where the issues are would be uses working from project files on the NAS, as a minimum you'd need to use a RAID stripe....that leaves you with good performance but no fault tolerance. A raid 10 would provide you with the fault tolerance plus performance but you'd lose half you're raw capacity, a RAID 5 probably wouldn't be good enough performance wise.....

    That's the reason i don't like 4 disk arrays, they're too limited. The best way is to try it out, you might find differing results to what i've described. But with potentially 20 users working on project file at the same time, a networked video solution needs to be of sufficient - both in terms of network speeds and disk perforamance to cope.

  13. #43
    PEO
    PEO is offline
    PEO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,093
    Thank Post
    457
    Thanked 150 Times in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    71
    there will be times where upto 60 users will be working on premier

  14. #44

    dhicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Knightsbridge
    Posts
    5,611
    Thank Post
    1,226
    Thanked 772 Times in 670 Posts
    Rep Power
    234
    Quote Originally Posted by torledo View Post
    However if the clients connected via cifs to the NAS or to a NAS head, you could carve up a single raid group and a single volume for all clients to access and work from.
    NAS head... I see that Samba can store "pointers" to other file systems, like symbolic links but across networked volumes. I'm thinking a central Samba server stored entirely on a RAM disk, with a file system that basically consists of a bunch of links to other file systems (which happen to be stored on individual workstations)...

    --
    David Hicks

  15. #45
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by MrHappy View Post
    there will be times where upto 60 users will be working on premier
    Woh!!!

    Can we be clear, do you anticipate project files to be worked on locally and then copied to the server on completion ? Or are you intending for this number of users to be working from project files directly on the NAS i.e the most convenient method.

    If it's the latter you'll really need to look at you're network and server infrastrtucre to see if it can cope. I'll try and put some figures together based on users working with compressed 25mbps SD DV streams over a tcp connection to a NAS or NAS head.....but i would maybe advise you to look at a local editing method. Or at the least split the computers over several servers. What i mean by that is that for 4 or 5 DV streams in premiere the performance requirements are quite modest, so you could get away with having a PC equipped with a fw drive or external firewire 3/4 disk caddy acting as the 'server'. You might want to investigate what dhicks was mentioning also, as that sounds like it could be more elegant than what i'm suggesting. I'm really not that familiar with distributed methods,
    Last edited by torledo; 7th April 2008 at 12:36 PM.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Moodle Server setup
    By zag in forum Virtual Learning Platforms
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 3rd March 2008, 03:34 PM
  2. Virtual Server Setup
    By CheeseDog in forum Thin Client and Virtual Machines
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 25th January 2008, 09:44 AM
  3. Setup Exchange Server 2003
    By FN-GM in forum Windows
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 29th December 2007, 05:09 PM
  4. VPN Setup on Windows 2003 R2 server
    By marvin in forum Windows
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 13th December 2007, 08:34 AM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 31st July 2007, 11:04 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •