Skip navigation
This discussion is locked

Generic Guideline for Disk Setup

Jun 18, 2010 5:44 AM

  Latest reply: Jeff Bellune, Aug 20, 2012 1:23 PM
Replies 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 9, 2011 9:39 AM   in reply to Vern Reynolds-Braun

    Actually, I would not save anything at all on any (R)aid0 (although the use of a (R)aid0 array is OK for those files that are to be kept for only a short period of time, such as media cache and pagefile as well as those media files that are to be transferred to something else immediately following your editing and/or encoding session). They have a risk of having everything on all of the drives in the array permanently lost if even one drive fails. Back up everything on a separate disk or a parity RAID (3/5/6) array if you must use (R)aid0.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 26, 2012 4:12 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Hi,

    I have a question I'd like to ask to clear up some conflicting info.  I am using basically the three drive setup.  One for the OS and programs, one drive for media, and a drive for previews/renders/media cache.

     

    I'm using just a standard WD Caviar Black for my C:, but my question is, between the media drive and the previews/renders/media cache drive, if one of those drives was a little bit faster than the other, which should it be?

     

    I ask because I'll be reconfiguring my drives soon with and I'll be using a 10,000rpm Velociraptor for each of those two drives, (I already have the drives, they're just not installed yet) one of them is a 3gb/s, the other is a 6gb/s.  Which do I put where? 

     

    One source told me that the render drive should be the fastest, the other source told me that the media drive should be fastest.  I could use your expertise.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 27, 2012 1:07 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Yes, I've got two Velociraptors.  One is 3gb/s, one is 6gb/s.  Sounds like you're saying the 6gb/s drive would go best as the render drive, and put the 3gb/s as the media drive?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 27, 2012 7:03 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Sorry, they're RAID 0 if that makes a difference (not with eachother, I have two 3gb/s and two 6gb/s)  I didn't mention the raid because I didn't think it would make a difference as far as that goes and I didn't want to have the subject changed to everyone's opinion of RAID 0 as always seems to happen.  Does 3g/6g still not matter?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 28, 2012 6:24 AM   in reply to RFDPiper

    Why don't you test both setups.  Then you can see what you really are getting instead of the rather useless specifications.  The best test is HDtune Pro to test both read and write speeds full disk tests, The complication is that to do the write test it has to be empty and unformatted.  Next best test that does both read and write testing is the ATTO disk benchmark

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 31, 2012 8:36 PM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    Good call, I'll try that.

     

    Should RAID volumes be basic or dynamic disks?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:15 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Only an infrequent Premiere user and although I will do some film work I will be using it mainly to make AV shows from my still photographs.  I am still a bit confused with terminology and set up questions.  Thanks to earlier advice in another post about external network drives and USB2 drives not being fast enough I have now bought a new 3TB internal SATA drive and am about to physically put it into the machine.

     

    I understand the bit about what goes onto C: (Windows, the Adobe Suite, Pagefile and Media cache) with the source images on a 2nd drive but I am still not sure if I should partition the new drive or not.  Although that creates a 3 drive system as far as the software is concerned it is still physically one piece of hardware so might have read/write conflicts.

     

    So for real newbies could the issue of what is what in the names, the scratch disk locations etc., be spelt out as getting this programme set up seems to be harder to do than making the creative input into the finished shows.

     

    Note - I do know from earler research that archiving my stills and finished shows on external drives is OK but for a new project the media will need copying onto the inernal SATA drives first so that Premeire works with those copies to get the necessary speed.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:23 AM   in reply to John (SLS Publicity)

    You want three physical drives. Partitioning a single drive defeats the purpose, and you are correct about the fact that a partitioned drive will be fighting itself on reads and writes. It sounds like you'll have two physical drives. Don't bother partitioning the second one. Just follow the guide on page one. Windows, Adobe, pagefile and media cache on main boot disk, and Media, Previews, Projects and Exports on second disk.

     

    A third physical disk would help, but you know that already.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:30 AM   in reply to wonderspark

    Thanks wonderspark.  In a two disk set-up the scratch disk setting therefore also needs pointing to the 2nd disk (non-OS) too? 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 7, 2012 2:53 AM   in reply to John (SLS Publicity)

    Media cache should be pointed to OS, and Previews pointed to 2nd (other) disk. There should be a check box to uncheck in order to allow media cache files to be located elsewhere, and there are two pulldowns to select. Then there are the Previews, and they have four pulldowns to select... audio x2 and video x2. One is under Preferences, the other is under Project Settings. I'm on a Mac, and I seem to recall the setup being slightly different on a PC, but you should be able to find both "scratch" setting sections and set them up accordingly.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2012 10:35 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    I was wondering if some might guide me a bit I have alot of questions:

     

    For my situation I will list my build, I wont be spending and more on the hardware.. for a while so..

     

    This is at the house about to be put together:

     

    Intel I7 core 3930k c2 SR0KY

    ASUS p9x79 Deluxe Mother Board, BIOS 0906, x79 Socket 2011

    32 GB DDR3 1600mHz Corsair Vengeance

    EVGA Geforce GTX 580 3GB

    Cooler Master Storm Trooper Case

    Corsair H 80 Liquid CPU cooler

    MS wireless touch mouse

    MS 2000 Wireless

    MS Windows 7 Pro 64bit Service pack 1

    Adobe Production Premium CS 5.5

    Lite-On iHBS212 12x Internal Blu-ray Disc Drive with Cyberlink Software - Retail

    Cooler Master Silent Pro M850 Series Modular 850W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified Active PFC Power Supply RS850-AMBAJ3-US

    Corsair Force GT 180 GB SATA III/6G SATA 6.0 Gb-s 2.5-Inch Solid State Drive - CSSD-F180GBGT-BK

    drives:

    2 of Corsair Flash Voyager GT USB 3.0 16 GB USB Drive (CMFVYGT3-16GB) (for raid drivers??, maybe windows 7 install?? )

    2 of Barracuda 7200RPM 1 TB SATA 6 GB/s NCQ 64 MB Cache 3.5-Inch Internal Bare Drive -ST1000DM003

    2 of Barracuda 7200RPM 2 TB SATA 6 GB/s NCQ 64 MB Cache 3.5-Inch Internal Bare Drive -ST2000DM001

     

    to be purchased: (Not now Cause I'm da** BROKE) Audio Interface( for my music- currently on MAC with Pro Tools Mix Cube), and External Storage Solution, new dual 27inch monitors.. because I want them!!

     

    ok.. I am not a techie nor do I have any formal computer science degree so go easy!

     

    I will not be buying a raid card in the forseeable (don't know how to spell that) future.

     

    I want to Put my OS/ APPs  on the force gt ssd...

    I want 2 of the hdd to be a raid 0 ... don't worry about be backing it up because I will.I will make copies of things on different drives until I can get an external back up, I will also be backing up source to bluray and archiving in a fireproof safe so future generations of space invaders can study and learn from one of the true great masters

     

    I want the last two hdd's to be seperate.

     

    I have been reading for weeks so please no more links I just wanna to play guitar really.

     

    Here's my shizzle:

    AVCHD from EL Cheapo Canon Vixia HF M 31, Stop Motion From Nikon D300, Smart Phone Footage, and in very soon but at least a few months for DSLR footage... I was thinking Nikon D7000 because I have Nikon Lenses (not that many but a few and a friend with about 15)

    I seen Dave H. from adobe talking about the container nikon uses.. but I am betting CS6 will be solving that and by the time I have the money there will be a new camera I will be after..) I will be doing smaller projects and a very low budget feature later...

     

    Here are my questions:

     

    Which controller for which drives?

    NCQ on or off for which drives?

    Sector setting for raid??

    Drivers and firmware updates to drives before windows install?

    Should I leave off all drives except the ssd and the odd till windows is installed?

    Setting  in BIOS before WIndows install?

    Install from a ODD or make usb drive windows install?

    All my disks are sata 3 , 6gbps, since I have only 4 sata 3 ports should I make one of these drives an esata external on the external powered esata 6 gbps port?

    WHat about my bluray burner, what port/controller does it go on..  sata 2 or 3.. is it only bootable on the intel chipset?

     

    Should I use the 2TB or the 1TB for the raid 0, I have several thousands of pics I'll be Migrating from the mac, plus many more I'll be taking, plus at about 500gb of personal files...many audio???

    If I use the 2x1TB it I can have the two other for a long term build up of personal junk..and later I can add more to the raid and maybe turn it redundant so I am not always copying files here and there.. I always save projects and source in a few different places before/ and during projects?? 

    Does the raid have to be on intel chips? Or can I use them on the marvell? and or does the ssd have to be on one or the other? I have heard that not having the raid on one and the boot on the other chipset can cause problems?

    Its a UEFI BIOS can I set up after windows as long as before I install I select RAID in BIOS for that ??

    I have read posts  about drives 2TB or larger needing to be gti instead of mbr (master boot record) for raid ..is this done after or before install of win 7. or was this something win 7 has solved... never owned windows 7, and i've never set up raid. barely know dos but I can follow a recipe, so can we keep to any command prompt stuff to a minimum, (making bootable )

    If later I need a bigger apps /os drive... whats the best way to plan this... just a clone of my apps/os drive then swap and copy?

     

    Will the raid 0 under perform if the 6gbps drives are on 3 gps port?

    I have read that disabling ncq greatly improves raid performance and seen a bench mark suggesting??

     

    I was thinking

     

    2 storage/junk/ on the MARVEL controller which would keep them sata 3 and zippy

    ssd on intel sata 3 with the chipset on raid not ahci??

    ODD on sata 3 intel

    2 raid 0 drives on intel sata2 (even though I paid for sata 3 drives??

    which leaves 2 x sata2 ports open for raid change /additional raid drives or additional internal odd

     

    will the raid and ssd on the same controller cause problems??

     

    when I finally get external backup what should I do something ethernet or esata backup .... raid???

     

    and would any techie just come over and do it all for me because they want to put together a x79 system!!.... haha??

     

    and should put together the system, with raid on intel (but not install the raid drives till I get another identical one or 2 drives on my next payday)

    to make to drives have some sort of redundancy) I really like the raid 0 with proper back ups.....I am not gonna be doin too much right off the bat...

    if I add one more drive of either 1 or 2 tb 7200 seagate identical to whichever one I use for the raid... and then make it have some redundancy and there for no need to back up as rigorously like  3 x 2TB(or 1TB) raid 5

     

    6 drives

    that would be :

    ssd intel sata 3 ..set to raid but ssd will never be raid

    ODD intel sata 2

    2 storage sata3 marvell controller (it there special setting on marvell for that ahci or raid or ide)

    install windows start messing around

    then next payday buy 1 more (that all!!!) identical sata 3 ,7200 seagate barracuda 64mb cache (1 or 2TB)drive even though it will go on intel sata2 just to keep all the raid drives the same.

    and install on the 3 remaining intel sata2 ... and setup a raid 5???

     

    for now I have only 5 drives..

    the last scenario would be 6 drives me adding one for a 3 disk raid 5 instead of a 2 disk raid 0.

     

    there would still be 1 sata 3 intel left for a future 2nd internal blueray or big ssd when prices drop, or another storage .. or I could throw the odd to the sata 3 and add another to the raid on sata 2

     

    another scenario:

    ssd (ssd is sata3) on marvel sata3 if I can boot and setup windows with that ...possible??

    1 sata 3 hdd storage on sata 3 marvell

    odd on sata 2 intel

    2 raid0 2TB's or the 1TB's (remeber they are sata3) on intel sata3

    and my last storage sata 3 on the intel sata 2 more sata3!!... I know... I heard you guys say why it doesnt matter.. but I bought sata3 and they should be on a sata ! ..J/K

     

    anyway, I need the best answer. This computer will not be just video!.. I have other stuff to fill the void.. besides hard drives!!.. I need a martin 28 as well! a dslr hd cam... I heli cam with gyros!!..need to start learning how to fly those little cheapos first!

     

    dont forget the ncq on or off.. and sector size...what ever happen to "plug and play"!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 8, 2012 9:34 AM   in reply to DavidJohnSaffell

    Do Premiere CS6 and the new Intel chipsets change any of the general recommendations?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 22, 2012 3:58 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    I currently have 3 HDDs (7200rpm) set up as suggested at the beginning of this thread.

     

    I would like to add a 128GB SSD.  Should I add it as (1) boot drive, (2) Previews/Exports or (3) Media Cache/Page File?

     

    Thanks!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 22, 2012 4:35 PM   in reply to Another Photographer

    Choice 1, add it as a boot drive.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 5:26 AM   in reply to JEShort01

    JEShort01, would adding the SSD have any effect on Premiere Pro performance or only application startup time?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 5:27 AM   in reply to Dabalani

    My experience with an SSD for OS/Programs has been that it slightly affects

    start time, but has given no speed boost to the actual performance of PrPro

    while I’m working.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 5:37 AM   in reply to Dabalani

    And I would agree with David.

     

    Jim

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 5:37 AM   in reply to davidbeisner2010

    So why not keep the OS on the hard drive and use the SSD for either the Previews drive or the PageFile/Media Cache drive?

     

    (Note, I also use Lightroom 4, where the Previews drive is constantly being accessed.)

     

    Alternatively, how about using the SSD to cache the Media Drive using something like Intel SRT?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 6:03 AM   in reply to Dabalani

    SSD is not recommended at all for the cache or previews drive due to their very limited number of rewrite cycles. Due to this constant rewriting, the SSD can fail in as little as a few weeks - and such failure due to excessive wear and tear is not covered at all by any company's warranty.

     

    You see, the cache/previews drive gets rewritten to hundreds or even thousands of times a day with heavy video editing use. And many MLC (that's correct: most consumer SSDs are MLC) SSDs are rated for a lifetime of only 10,000 rewrite cycles total.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 6:11 AM   in reply to Dabalani

    One of the factors SSD drives improve on is Disk Latency. The access time for SSD drives is measure in microseconds instead of milliseconds. This means an SSD drive can handle a much larger execution queue than mechanical drives. This allows you to have the OS and some cache files like the page file on the SSD drive without losing performance. The current SSD drives from Intel are rated to handle 20GB or more of data a day for 10 years without failing due to blowing through the write cycles. So you should not have a problem with the number of write cycles either.

     

    Eric

    ADK

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 6:14 AM   in reply to ECBowen

    So Eric,

     

    If you don't care about OS and application start-up times, how would you take advantage of SSD's speed to boost performance?  Put the Media Cache on the boot drive?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 6:21 AM   in reply to Dabalani

    The Media Cache files can get very large especially over time. I would not put that on the SSD drive. However other Cache files such as the Page File or Photoshop cache files would go there and would improve your overall experience with interfacing with applications.

     

    Eric
    ADK

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 23, 2012 11:14 AM   in reply to ECBowen

    The new enhanced global caching in After Effects benefits dramtically from having its folder placed on an SSD drive. Adobe encourages this approach.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 24, 2012 11:03 AM   in reply to lasvideo

    When did Adobe become the gold standard on hardware? They also encourage RAID0 and 5 on disks larger than 1TB which is the recipe for write errors galore. SSDs don't do well with heavy writes, plain and simple. No way would I put cache on an SSD and this point in the technology. Two years from now that may be different, and if that happens then yes, SSDs are a good choice, but not in their current state. If you want fast cache for the same or les money, the Western Digital prices have finally come back down to earth. Get yourself the 300gb or 450gb Velociraptor which spins at 10,000rpm. That'd make a fine cache drive.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 24, 2012 2:21 PM   in reply to PaulieDC

    PaulieDC wrote:

    They also encourage RAID0 and 5 on disks larger than 1TB which is the recipe for write errors galore.

     

    Get yourself the 300gb or 450gb Velociraptor which spins at 10,000rpm. That'd make a fine cache drive.

    I have to disagree with the first statement, never have seen any write performance problems on any disk arrays AFTER checking out read and write performance of the individual disks before putting them in arrays.

     

    I whole heartedly agree with the second statement.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 24, 2012 3:03 PM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    Actually Bill, you're partially right, I had to write that in a hurry. 1TB and under probably won't show issues, and 1TB and over usually doesn't for Raid Edition drives, but wire up two 2TB WD Greens and data loss will eventually occur. It's not realistic for Adobe to detail that out in specifics, I understand that. Also, there's a lot of misconceptions floating regarding SSDs and a lot of the early issues are solved, but the write-often problem does still exist, at least for now. One thing that shpould be broadcast to every SSD pioneer is not to defrag, or at least not repeatedly, but get a good utility like O&O Defrag that will perform TRIM instead.

     

    But anyway, to the credit of the folks on this site, most people who understand RAID know all about what drives to use anyway, lol. So for the noob, I'll just steer 'em at a Raptor until they're ready to open the wallet for RE drives and a good PCI Raid card. My point was to undo the boxed thinking that if Adobe says it, it must be fine.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 24, 2012 4:44 PM   in reply to PaulieDC

    The Velociraptor is a 2.5" drive.  Doesn't that partially negate its faster spin rate as far as throughput is concerned?  Also, it is a couple of years old at least, so it has lower density than the newest platters.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 24, 2012 5:32 PM   in reply to Dabalani

    All I will say regarding drives, is that I have had 4 WD Black 2TB Drives in my Sans Digital External Raid Box in Raid 5 for almost 3 years. Never had an issue other than one disk dieing 2 weeks in. But they expect that, thus the 30 day return/exchange on drives. I also have 4 WD 640gb Drives in Raid 5 in my computer running with bios software raid and have never had an issue either other than when Intel Matrix Storage program updated to the 8.9.9.??? and higher versions Where it kept dropping a disk. Did some digging, went back to the 8.8.8.???? Version and have never had a hickup!! That's been going for over 3 years as well. Just set your power setting to never spool down drives and it's all good to go!!!

     

    -Paul

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 24, 2012 6:00 PM   in reply to PaulieDC

    PaulieDC,

     

    If you are bad-mouthing RAID arrays with WD Greens, then possibly your issue is with the Greens themselves, not the "RAID" technology! Greens, especially the earlier generations from WD, have had a simply horrible track record.

     

    Jim

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 24, 2012 6:15 PM   in reply to Dabalani

    Dabalani wrote:

     

    The Velociraptor is a 2.5" drive.  Doesn't that partially negate its faster spin rate as far as throughput is concerned?  Also, it is a couple of years old at least, so it has lower density than the newest platters.

    Actually the 10,000 rpm 2.5-inch drive, especially the newest 450 GB and 600 GB drives are the absolute best single drives you can possible use without going to the 15,00 rpm SAS drives

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 7:33 AM   in reply to PaulieDC

    So what are the pros/cons of internal vs external raid? I was thinking about purchasing a stardom sohoraid sr4 box for an external array but would rather do what's best if internal options are better. Interesting to know that you don't want to go over 1TB with a raid 3 or 5 array, I didn't know that was an issue. Anyhow, internal or external?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 7:52 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    I think he meant more than 1TB per drive. Is that still incorrect?

     

    Thanks much Harm! Can you clear up one more thing for me? If I'm purchasing a nice motherboard with a RAID controller on it, is this not as good or the same thing as purchasing a RAID controller card?

     

    I lied, one more thing... So if I have 4 drives for a raid, I've seen you've suggested RAID 3 over RAID 5, is that right? Would all my media and project and export files now go on this raid? That's what it looked like on the initial graphic or chart.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 8:18 AM   in reply to db2012_02

    Maybe Harm can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe if you get a good separate RAID card, you are better off performance wise, you pay extra $$ but get more performance.

     

    /Ulf

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 25, 2012 9:05 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Right, please don't even attempt mobo raid, there's nothing like a dedicated card.

     

    At this point I'm not sure where the guns are pointing with the whole RAID/Drive Size thing but it seems to have gotten a bit off the path. My point was simply that if you are going to use individual hard drives that are larger than 1TB in a RAID array, you've got to be sure to use RAID Edition (or whatever other manufacturers call it) drives, because when you start joining large drives, the raid edition drives have an unrecoverable read error rate of only 1 in 10^15 bits, whereas regular desktop drives usually weigh in at an error rate of 1 in 10^14. If you string a bunch of 500GB drives together with that less efficiant read error rate, the chances for failure aren't highly elevated, but when you try RAID with 2TB or 3TB consumer drives, your chances of error increase tremendously. I picked the WD Greens just as an example, not a target, just making the point. It's not an opinion, it's the standard for enterprise-level storage design.

     

    Now, had I actually read the guides that Harm and others have provided, I'd probably find that this is all covered already, lol. I think you guys get the point: attempting to RAID huge consumer drives (especially on a mobo) is like trying to run the Boston Marathon in sandals... you can do it, but...

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (14)