1 2 3 Previous Next 107 Replies Latest reply on Jun 22, 2015 7:10 AM by cc_merchant Go to original post Branched to a new discussion.
      • 40. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
        raspberryjuice

        I had a couple of quick questions regarding RAID and best disk set up on a PC for my requirements, if anybody had the time to help......

         

         

        1st question: I mainly edit 3 - 4 minute video shorts to music.  I film on an EOS7d and a Sony Camcorder (HDV). I do this as a hobby not professionally or for pay.  My main requirement for RAID is a belt and braces approach for ensuring that my original video files and photos never get lost.  I've just had a NAS expire that wasn't RAID so was considering replacing it with one that was.

        Given that I only do this for fun - I was thinking of storing all my video and photo content on a NAS with four 2TB disks (RAID 1) and then copying across to my PC only the files that I need to perform an edit.  I've seen the Synology 410j which appears like it might do the trick.

         

        If I then lose my work in progress on the PC - it is no big deal (annoying - but as I'm doing this as a hobby I could live with losing WIP as long as my original files are always protected).

         

        Does this sound like a sensible thing to do - given I don't really think I need the cost of a dedicated RAID card on a PC and I will use the NAS for other things - like music for my Sonos system etc?

         

         

        2nd question:  I have a reasonable spec PC - but think I made a mistake with my hard disk set up.   Basically, if all my content is protected on my NAS, I just want the fastest performance for editing and from the built in disks on my PC.  Clearly if I can get RAID cheaply on the PC then great - but speed and stability is most important.

         

        I currently have 1 x boot drive with a 250GB SERIAL ATA 3-Gb/s HARD DRIVE WITH 8MB CACHE.

        I then have 2 x 2TB SERIAL ATA 3-Gb/s HARD DRIVE WITH 32MB CACHE in RAID 0 (stripe)

         

        Basically I'd like to speed up the editing process on the PC.  I have i7 920, 12GB CORSAIR XMS3 TRI-DDR3 1333MHz, ASUS® P6T WS PROFESSIONAL, 2GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX285 PCI EXPRESS, Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit  and the hard disks I mentioned above.

         

        The maximum size of content for an edit consists of 80gb worth of Cineform files.  So if I copy that from a NAS to the PC I can then start an edit.  (I use Adobe Creative Suite 4.1)

         

        What disk configuration should I get on my PC?

        How should I structure them?

        What files should I put where?

         

        Happy to pay for small SSDs for boot drive etc if that makes a difference?

        Or perhaps Velociraptors?

         

         

        The main reason for making the editing as quick as possible is that I have limited time.  This is a hobby and I have a real job so need to get edits done as quickly as possible.

         

        Thanks in advance if anybody has the time to advise / help.

        • 41. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
          SimonGTXT

          Well Thankyou Harm, that is the most useful info on RAID I have found on the net. Unfortunately the net also led me to a page where someone stated that 'editing HD movies in APP is futile without RAID'. Reading through everyone's posts on here, this is obviously an untrue or old statement so I'm looking to find some trustworthy advice on the best setup for editing my daughter's HD .mov's shot on a Kodak V1273 at 1280 x 720. Data Rate 7.14 mbits/sec. I currently have:

          Mobo: AsRock 4Core1333 viiv

          CPU:  LGA775 Intel Pentium Dual Core E6300 (2.80 stock, it's at 3.6 atm)

          RAM: 1GB Ballistix Tracer, 1GB GEIL 667 (DDR2)

          GPU:  Sapphire Vapor-x HD5770 1GB

          HDD:  2xWDC WD1600JS-75NCB2 (Western Digital 160gb, one has had a lot of use and is slower and noisier than the other)

                    1xST3808110AS (Seagate 80GB)

           

          This is obviously inadequate to edit HD movs and I am looking to upgrade next month. I only have the trial version of APP 4.0 CS4 and I will be purchasing a licence key and Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bit with my (son's!) new build.

          I am looking at upgrading the MOBO, RAM and HDD's to:

          Mobo:   ASUS P5Q Deluxe P45                      £129.99 GBP

          Ram:    PC2-8500+ OCZ Reaper (2x2GB)         £ 99.99

          HDD's:  4x WDC Black 640GB 6GB/s              £ 54.99 each so I think £119.96?

           

          My must have's for Mobo are: LGA775 (I don't have the money go i5  or i7), e-SATA and good o.c.-ing abilities/stability. The ASUS has these.

          I don't have the money to move onto i7 yet and even i5 boards with SATA 6GB/s connections are too pricey with the CPU.

          My budget is only about £ 450.

           

          I think the question is:

          1. Does anyone know if there is / should I wait for a board that's LGA775 DDR2 e-SATA (e-SATA is a must) with 6GB/s SATA or would my upgraded system above without 6GB/s be sufficient when set out right?

          2. If the above system is fine, would I be better or worse off RAID-ing for performance?

           

          Thankyou Everyone your input will be greatly appreciated.

          • 42. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
            Harm Millaard Level 7

            Even though you will not directly benefit with only 4 GB of memory, I suggest you get Win7-64 Pro, not Ultimate and certainly not the 32 bit version.


            1. Chances that new 775 boards will be introduced are negligent. It is too dated. Your selected board will do for HDV/DV. For AVCHD the CPU is the major bottleneck.

             

            2. No sense in raiding those 4 disks.

            • 43. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
              SimonGTXT Level 1

              Harm,

              Thankyou for your quick response.

               

              Judgding by your reply to mine and other posts, 1) I am understanding that the best way forward would be to go for the upgraded system and forget about SATA 6gb/s until I can afford i7 end of this year. I need to upgrade my Mobo as the one I have is very unstable. 2) I am also understanding the best way to set up my HDD's would be:

               

              C: 640 GB for just OS &  Programs

              D: 640 GB for just pagefile,  media cache and previews

              E: 640 GB for just project save files,  indexed and conformed/peak files

              F: 640 GB for just original media

              And of course change Win7Ultx86 for Win7Prox64

               

              3) I'm understanding that a big thing is for these hard drives to be empty and not full up of my backups: I have a 500 GB external  and a 500 GB WDC Black coming for external backups. I'll only have the time to use the computer a few hours every week but (external) backup is/has always been big for me.

              Are my understandings correct?

               

              Thankyou again Harm, I know that you do this for free and in your own time and I really appreciate your help.

               

              Simon

              • 44. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                Harm Millaard Level 7

                Simon,

                 

                You are completely correct, both in your disk setup, and the backups.

                • 45. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                  SimonGTXT Level 1

                  Harm,

                  That's great thankyou very much

                   

                  Simon

                  • 46. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                    ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                    Excellent explanation. A few things to consider now are the changes that the tapeless workflow has brought to video. Before the tapeless codecs backing up video raws and material was really based on production time and environment more than anything. The enterprise world had to maintain the type of data recovery for ages while the video world could just go back to tape. Now video has entered the enterprise world with the amount of data to backup or maintain and the length of archive. I have many clients who have to maintain raws and or at least finished projects for 6 months to a year period of time. A standard project could be 56GB to 100GB of data that has to be stored with the current codecs. What that means is redundant arrays are for more suitable now to the video world as they have always been for the Enterprise community.

                     

                    Raid 6 has one big advantage over raid 5 or raid 3. The read speed is significantly faster than raid 5 and the redundancy is far more secure than raid 3. The only requirement is as Harm said the hardware controller. In the tapeless world, editors are not capturing anymore. They are simply copying files from one media to another. This limits the write draw back to raid 6 due to the sequential write that happens most of the time with this method and the higher access time that raid 6 has is negligible when copying few large files from another media that is far slower than the raid anyway. What you need in a tapeless workflow is read speed during the edit workflow which raid 6 has in abundance. The render time writing files is based on the codec and often does not have much performance gain when the write is over 150 to 200 MB/s. You also have the best level of data protection allowing up to 2 disks to fail simultaneously and still retain the array in degraded status. If you keep a hot spare available then your chance of complete failure is near minimized to a complete environmental failure such as a power hit. That can be also limited by software backups to a NAS or E-Sata drive that is only connected to power when needed.

                     

                    The raid controller is the component though that decides the level of performance and data protection you get. Areca is one of many controller manufacturers that you can get. The performance hit over 50% capacity Sata drives have also happens in raid arrays depending on the controller and the level of raid. Many of the $400 to $600 raid controllers will give you full performance throughout the entire raid volume in a Raid 0 but will still get the 50% volume capacity performance drop with Raid 5 or 6. That also changes when manufacturers update their firmware and change their controller cpu's. The Atto controllers use to be able to maintain performance over the entire array in raid 5 or raid 6 arrays but now have the performance drop with their current chips and firmware. Areca's mid range controllers have always had that performance hit but evidently their higher end controllers that harm has do not. The best controllers you can get are always SAS controllers. Those are basically SCSI controllers which handle Sata drives. SCSI controllers were always able to maintain the performance in an array which was why they were so dominant a decade ago. Now they use the same controller type with Sata drives. The reason some are able to maintain performance and some are not depending on the raid level has to do with the firmware and how it communicates with the controller on each HDD itself. That is really what you are paying for besides the extra ram when buying the $1000+ controllers. Also the raid management software and driver has some affect on this as well. The raid management software affects how efficient and accurate your redundancy is maintained and your rebuild success. It also can decide if your raid controller can get confused in a few scenarios and corrupt your raid 5. I have not seen a raid 6 get corrupted yet so not sure if that can happen. Either way I use and push my client's toward Intel's SAS controllers. They have the new SAS 600 models and they perform as good as Areca or Atto since they all use LSI chips. They have the best management software out that I have seen and they are normally half the price of ATTO controllers. Just some further information to help with deciding what is best for your situation and editing.

                    • 47. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                      baumanico Level 1

                      Hi,

                       

                      I followed your advices and configured my media system with WD Black 2TB disks, but the data transfer seems still slow...

                       

                      As for the other it worked well with your configuration and macbook pro, I have to conclude that the problem is the external case -

                      I use Raidsonic dual bay with USB 2.0

                       

                      Can you recommend any other external case, I could use (2-4 bay) with FireWire 800 (as eSata to Macbook does not work to my understanding)

                       

                      Cheers!

                      • 48. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                        Harm Millaard Level 7

                        The slowness is caused by using USB2, that is about the worst connection to use when you want speed.

                         

                        Isn't there a way to get eSATA on a MAC by using a PCI Express card to eSATA connector? Or would this be your solution: http://www.g-technology.com/products/g-raid.cfm

                        • 49. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                          sarmour2 Level 1

                          Harm, just a comment on that particular 4 TB external drive with the two big Hitachi's . I have a new one on a workstation (win 7 x64)  with the eSata connection and am not real impressed so far. It tested at 160 MB/s with HD Tach, but in real life seems to be much slower. Transfers to it from another internal 1 TB SATA drive were only 64 MB/s, which is much slower than going from my other internal drives to each other, or across our 1 Gb network.

                           

                          I'm not sure if something else is wrong somewhere in this setup, but he probably should get other opinions before deciding. If it's something else on this particular ws, then it still could be a very good solution. But it would be good to hear from others on that drive too...

                          • 50. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                            Bill Gehrke Most Valuable Participant

                            baumanico wrote:

                             

                            Hi,

                             

                            I followed your advices and configured my media system with WD Black 2TB disks, but the data transfer seems still slow...

                             

                            As for the other it worked well with your configuration and macbook pro, I have to conclude that the problem is the external case -

                            I use Raidsonic dual bay with USB 2.0

                             

                            Can you recommend any other external case, I could use (2-4 bay) with FireWire 800 (as eSata to Macbook does not work to my understanding)

                             

                            Cheers!

                            Try looking at this one as an example

                             

                            Here is a great vendor that caters to Mac but they only sell units with drives in place.

                            • 51. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                              hellopaul_1 Level 1

                              I didn't want to make another topic so decided I'll make my try here:

                               

                              At the moment the only disk I have is WD Caviar 160GB and some WD Passport 500GB for backup. I was wondering which option would be better to speed up my computer a little:

                               

                              SSD 30GB for cache files or 2x500GB RAID0 for cache files?

                               

                              Or maybe the best option would be to buy these 2 500GB WD Black and then:

                               

                              C: 160GB for OS and programs

                              D: 500GB for pagefile, media cache

                              E: 500GB for project files/all other media

                              F: 500GB G-Drive e-Sata for Backup (which I want to buy too)

                               

                              I'd be very thankful for all your answers.

                               

                              Regards

                              Paul

                              • 52. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                                Harm Millaard Level 7

                                Look here: Adobe Forums: Generic Guideline for Disk Setup

                                 

                                Just yesterday I noticed that a 80 GB SSD is € 205 here. A 1 TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 is € 55. I rather have 4 x 1 TB F3's than a single SSD. About 50 times the storage capacity for approximately the same price and around twice the performance of a single SSD. That sounds like a no-brainer to me.

                                • 53. Re: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question
                                  hellopaul_1 Level 1

                                  Thank You very much Harm

                                  Now the only consider is - WD Caviar BLACK or Samsung Spinpoint F3. I must do some research