5 Replies Latest reply on Mar 30, 2009 1:40 PM by Harm Millaard

    Raid 5 partitioning

    bojesen Level 1
      Still on my old MacPro, I consider using a LaCie Biggest extern HD for PP editing purposes. I remember Harm mentioned that the best editing environment was using three disks, but would partitioning, one for source, one for editing and one for output be equally good?
        • 1. Re: Raid 5 partitioning
          Ruud Blauw Level 1
          >but would partitioning, one for source, one for editing and one for output be equally good?

          No. A partitioned disk is still just one device. It could be worse than using a single unpartitioned disk.
          • 2. Re: Raid 5 partitioning
            bojesen Level 1
            Thank you for blitz response. Worse, in what way?
            • 3. Re: Raid 5 partitioning
              Harm Millaard Level 7
              Partitioning implies that the OS must refer to the partition table at the beginning of the disk for each and every disk operation, just to know where a partition starts and ends. This step is not necessary for non-partitioned disks. So effectively you are introducing extra overhead for each disk operation. Apart from extra overhead there is nothing to make the disk faster, it only slows it down by having to move the heads over greater distances which takes longer. It also creates much more wear and tear on the mechanism, creates higher temperatures (which are bad) and more noise.

              Partitioning is a thing from the past when disks were expensive. Nowadays you buy a 1 TB disk for around $ 100, so it makes no sense to partition anymore.

              BTW, I said at least three disks for comfortable editing and I meant three physical disks. I currently use 1 disk for OS/programs and another 12 1 TB disks all internally for comfortable editing. In addition I use both a couple of servers for storage/backup and a 10 TB NAS. IMO it is not worth the aggravation to skimp on physical disks.
              • 4. Re: Raid 5 partitioning
                bojesen Level 1
                Thank you, Harm, for your very thorough explanation. So all in all, it would be better to use my 2 TB extern disk for archiving and free two of my internal (four) disks for editing - or indeed buy two new disks. I do well remember you said "physical" disks, but I did not realise what problems partitioning meant. Now, I don't have the specs for your monster machine you supplied at hand, but I seem to recall that you set it up in raid - it that a bonus worth while?
                I do apologize if this is all elementary to most editors.
                BTW how did the skiing go - hope you didn't break any bones - or for that matter an arm and a leg.
                • 5. Re: Raid 5 partitioning
                  Harm Millaard Level 7
                  Sigurd,

                  Here are the details of my (budget) system:



                  In various other benchmarks I did, the average transfer rate for the Raid30 array varied between 650 and 730 MB/s. So with a good controller, plenty of cache and a BBM, it is hard to beat in raw performance. Whether you will ever need that kind of performance for just plain NLE work is doubtful.

                  The skiing was fabulous. I went with my daughter, who has been a ski instructor in the Jungfrau region for the past 4 months, predominantly for ClubMed guests, and we had about one meter of fresh snow, followed by several days with only clear blue skies and great snow on the Lauberhorn and other slopes. Unfortunately I had to get back to work and could not stay for the "Ski legends Lauberhorn race" where a number of old friends were participating, among them my old classmate Walter Tresh, Olympic medal winner in Sapporo. That's life.