Hardware recommendations for capturing VHS / RCA composite better than Hauppauge USB?

Hi folks,
I am trying to archive our old VHS tapes (NTSC 720x480 29.97 fps). I am using a $45 Hauppauge USB-Live-2 Video Capture. It's certainly adequate to see what's happenning in general, but it's also not as good as one would see e.g. playing these tapes on a TV. In particular, the right side of the image is missing some pixels (as though the right-most 20 or so pixels are blacked out, all up and down the right edge). Quite possibly, there are other subtler problems.
FWIW, I am doing the initial capture with AVS Video Recorder (to UYVY AVI format), then importing this (DV NTSC 720x480 29.97 fps) to PE11 and exporting to DV NTSC 720x480 29.97 fps MP4. PE11's MP4s are about 30% the size of the AVS AVIs.
Bill Hunt here recommended looking into DV Bridges (thanks, Bill!). However, I am not entirely sure what to look for. I found some Canopus devices on NewEgg, but they are $170, $200, or more. I'm not sure it's worth $200 just to save a 20-pixel edge on approximately 30 home videos. Anyway, can anyone point me toward hardware that works well with PE11 and VHS composite?
Thanks if you can help!
Mike

You get what you pay for. 
I have been using a Canopus ADVC100 for almost 10 years, and have had 100% success right out of the box the first time I used it.  As noted above the model 55 (which wasn't available when I bought my unit) should be all you need.
Before I got the Canopus unit I tried several 'cheaper' (USB) devices but never got satisfactory repeatable reuslts.  Be sure you have at least a Firewire 400 connection.  If you need to add such a port make sure the device uses a TI chip to avoid conversion problems.  I purchased a " Syba Low Profile PCI-Express 1394b/1394a (2B1A) Card, TI Chipset, Extra Regular Bracket SD-PEX30009 " (which has both FW 400 & 800 ports) apprx $26 from Amazon.
By the way I use the Canopus to convert/capture both VHS and Hi8 analog tapes.

Similar Messages

  • Hardware recommendations for Oracle server

    I'm looking for hardware recommendations for a new Oracle database server. I'd like to have Active/Passive redundancy, so I imagine an external storage device is necessary. Does Oracle publish any hardware recommendations based on budget? I'm not sure what our budget would be but I can assume two database servers and a single external storage device in the $20k range.

    Oracle does not publish any recommendations at all.
    If they did, the recommendations would be based on load and expected performance characteristics, not based on budget.
    Your best bet is to chose a vendor (Sun, IBM, HP, Dell) and ask them. Each of those vendors has a group that specializes in answering this kind of question.

  • May you please provide some information for Cisco 1600 AP is better than Juniper AP ?

    Hello all,
    May you please provide some information for Cisco 1600 AP is better than Juniper AP ?
    I would like to know some comparison test between Cisco 1600 AP with Juniper AP.
    Thanks very much !
    Crows

    you cannot compare like this you need to compare it with model by model just compare the data sheet of both .But remeber cisco has larger portfolio and is ranked better then juniper in Gartner report  2013 you can you that in reference.
    ********Do rate helpful posts*************

  • Best video Hardware/software for converting VHS DVD and others on Mac?

    Hello,
    I am having problems finding some much needed details on what the best software/hardware is for converting video formats on a Mac. I should note I am using a NEW iMac 4GB memory and Leopard OS so what I use needs to be compatible. Perhaps next year I will get a Mac Pro, but for now I'm using this setup. Here's is what I need to do:
    1. Transfer old VHS tapes (home movies and such) to DVD. I need to be able to use DL DVD discs for my recordings so I don't have to switch DVDs. In other words make them just like the DVDs you play that you buy. Therefore, they also must be able to playback in home theater DVD players, not just on the computer. I would assume the best way as for encoding is to get the VHS tape in digital format on the hard drive, then use the codecs to turn them into DVDs?
    2. Once on the hard drive I also need to convert them to a format neutral playback on both the Mac and PC. What is the best, MPEG 4?
    3. The ability to do some nice editing of making bookmarks, chapters and thumbnails for the DVD menu and divisions I wish to make. In other words, if I have a home movie containing my Summer and Winter vacation, I want to insert bookmarks at points to skip to like in a movie DVD and also have a thumbnail of it just like DVD movies does.
    4. A nice MAIN menu for the DVD that will let me hit the main categories, not just chapters for the TOP level DVD menu. Such as Summer Vacation, Winter vacation.
    5. The software should be easy to use so I don't have to take a HUGE crash course requiring lots of work making the project a chore. Also, I don't want or need a professional package, just something simple that is less than $200 per software program. Not the expensive $500+ software options for movie makers.
    Thank you for any tips and advice on this matter.

    "Best software/hardware" depends on your exact needs & wants.
    One simple way to transfer your VHS tapes to DVD is with a *DVD Recorder*. Many of these come with VHS and DVD decks already built in. Insert your VHS tape, a blank DVD, hit record and off it goes. When finished, you have a playable DVD.
    To transfer your VHS tapes to DV for editing you will need a converter. The *Canopus ADVC-110* is a very nice, relatively inexpensive device that will do that job for you. (It's also possible to use most modern DV camcorders as converters, too.) You would connect your VHS deck to the Canopus box via their analog video & audio connections, then connect the Canopus box via FW to your Mac, and then when you play the VHS tape you would capture the video in iMovie or FCE.
    Once your videos are captured on your Mac, you could use iMovie or *Final Cut Express* to do whatever editing you might want to do. Regardless of which one you edit with, however, it's iDVD that you would use to create your DVD menus and burn your DVDs.
    So, overall, the workflow would be like this: *VHS Deck > Converter (camcorder or converter box) > Capture on Mac (iMovie or FCE) > Editing application (iMovie or FCE) > iDVD > DVD*
    For playback on computers MPEG4 would be an ok choice, H.264 is probably a better choice, and then there's the matter of whether or not you want to export as a QuickTime movie and/or AVI.
    iLife came with your Mac, so you already have iMovie and iDVD. How about giving them a try before you consider investing in a significantly more sophisticated application like Final Cut Express. (just my opinion)

  • Hardware recommendations for render farm?

    Hello,
    what would you recommend for a small render farm for mixed AE projects (mostly HD content, short projects with only a few seconds and layers and bigger ones with multiple HD layers and up to 15min or longer.)
    is it better to have more cores (AMD opteron servers with 48 cores for example) or better more performance per core but less cores (Intel Xeon servers)?
    And how much memory would be optimal?
    What can you recommend for network connection to the shared storaged, how fast shall this be?

    I like Harm's analogy better then mine. One prize cow vs. 20 regular cows. The imagery is very clear. In a production environment, where volume counts, more is better then a single top notch one. A single cow can only produce so much mik per day, no matter how extraordinary it is.  But 20 can theoretically produce 20 times more (practically, maybe  17 to 18). Quantity, not quality. I'm not saying that you should get crappy hardware. Just good hardware, not high performance ones.
    As you know, it's not because you buy a computer that costs twice as much, that you'll get twice the processing power. First of all, forget dual CPU computers for a render farm, it's not worth it. Get a regular quad core. As you compare prices vs. performance (do a chart), get the CPU that gives you the best bang for the buch (just before the price curve goes up).
    I personally think 32GB is overkill in a render farm environment. 16GB is way more then enough. Remember that you're not doing a RAM preview farm (if such a thing exists), but rather, fractioning the render process to various computers. While 16GB is good, 2GB isn't. But 8GB can be an nice compromise. Remember, you're trying to drive the cost down of a computer, so you can buy many computers. But RAM is cheap, so, best bang for the buck, 16GB can be possible. Then again, it depends on other overall factors to keep the price for the computer down.
    Network speed. Yes you could get 10GB NICs and a 10GB switch. But that can drive the price up substantially. If you can get a good price on them, great. If not, stick to 1GB. Get a motherboard that has 2x 1GB NICs on board, so you can aggregate the network connections together to get 2GB. You could eventually add a quad 1GB PCIe card down the road. The computer that has the project assets should have an aggregated quad (or more) NIC inside. You want to be able to push the media as fast as possible to the render farm.
    Other things to consider... or rather, not consider. Graphic card is a non issue on a server farm. AE is all about CPU. Some mobos come with on-board graphics. Usually, it's cheaper, and consumes less power. You also want to drive the energy costs down when you multiply by X number of computers. Just get a KVM solution that will be able handle X computers. You don't need a RAID on render farm computers. A regular hard drive will do. I'd even go with a green drive that consumes less power.
    And depending on how many computers you have, to reduce the footprint, you might want to get low profile rackmount casings and put them in a rack.  Plus think of putting it in it's own room, because it'll be very noisy!

  • Device recommended to capture VHS?

    Some weeks ago, this forum provided advice about the best device to capture VHS in a format PE ready. I was unable to follow up on the advice at the time ... any chance someone remembers what it was? I think it was "Pyro" something ... could not find the postings on the forum search. Thanks for any help!!

    Bobbi,
    This is the Photoshop Elements forum. I believe you meant to post (and search) the Premier Elements forum.
    Is this what you were looking for?
    http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc42a1c/0
    Bob

  • What are hardware recommendations for Forte 4gl 3.0.M.2 under HP_UX?

    We are running into performance issues that seem to be related to cpu speed using Forte 3.0.M.2 fully compiled under HP_UX 11 on three server models: HP9000/D370, /D390, and /L1000. We see large numbers of select calls (at the os level) 200-300 in a 15 second interval, that pin cpu usage. On the D370 (Pentium 166MHz) the spikes last for as long as 5-20 seconds and our users are complaining. We have not had complaints (yet) about the D390s (Pentium? approx 240MHz) or the L1000s (PIII? approx 440MHz).
    What cpu speed was recommended for 3.0.M.x? We strongly suspect we are expecting too much of the D370 boxes but need supporting information to make our case.

    Hi Patrick,
    I do not think your problem is CPU-related. What do you mean by select calls? If your select stament is a SQL Select one then what maybe is happening is that your data access methods are no longer effective due to an increse in the volume of data they are now handling. What I would suggest you is to find out which are the methods having problems and then find out what the code does. If you figure out the problem is the volume of data you are handling then you will have to change your code to implement a better data interaction.
    Anyways... keep me posted... I will be more than happy in helping you out.

  • Specific hardware recommendations for PE12, Graphics for Win8.1

    We are upgrading our video processing system from Win XP 32bit/ PE10.  I plan on going to PE12 and need better recommendations for CPU, Graphics, Memory, etc than the Tech/Specs recommendations. Most importantly, does PE12 use GPU acceleration?

    Not so much here, but over in the Premiere Pro forum several Adobe employees post to help people
    I can't remember which one, but at least one Adobe employee has "alluded" to the idea that the specifications on the product pages are "market" driven to increase sales, not "technical" driven to let people know what they should have for EFFECTIVE video editing
    The 1st configuration on the page I listed will work OK for P-Elements (it would not work so well for P-Pro)
    When you do start using v12, lots of help links at http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1275830

  • Hardware recommendations for Planning & HFM

    We currently have Hyperion Planning 11.1.1.3 running on three servers (one dedicated for RDBMS, one dedicate for Essbase, and another that is running everything else (EPMA, Planning, Financial Reporting, Shared Services, Workspace, Calc Manager, etc).
    We are going to implementing HFM and upgrading to 11.1.2 for our current components and I have reviewed the server sizing for 500 users (175 active) for Planning and HFM. I was wondering if anyone had any experience running both Planning and HFM together and if I need to bump up the server specs for anything to run both smoothly?
    The EPMA Installation Start Here recommends the following for Planning for Windows Servers:
    Web Server: 4 x 3 GHZ+ 16 GB RAM
    Essbase Server: 4 x 3 GHZ+ 8 GB RAM
    Other Services Server: 4 x 3 GHZ+ 16 GB RAM
    RDBMS Server: 4 x 3 GHZ+ 16 GB RAM
    And recommends for HFM:
    Web Server: 4 x 3 GHZ+ 16 GB RAM
    Financial Management Server: 8 x 3 GHZ + 16 GB RAM
    Other Services Server: 2 x 3 GHZ + 8 GB RAM
    RDBMS: 4 x 3 GHZ+ 16 GB RAM
    The Essbase server for Planning will be dedicated, and the Financial Management Server for HFM will be dedicated, but if we wanted to share the Web Server and Other Services Server for both Planning and HFM, do you think we need to size these servers a bit more robustly to handle both HFM and Planning?
    We are looking at 8 x 2.66 GHZ with 32 GB of memory for our Web Server, Other Services Server and Financial Management Server (essbase and RDBMS are sized fine for now), so I just wanted to get some input from the community before we make the recommendation to go ahead with that hardware.
    Thanks!

    Depending upon your Essbase/Planning Application you might need to increase the Ram. Remember you plan the architecture for 3 - 5 years in mind. Its a good practice to have variable like number of users increase per year, new applications, evolving data-set etc into consideration.
    In one of the post, one of the expert suggested to have 2Gb per essbase application.
    HTH
    MN

  • Different approach for capturing vhs to fcp

    yes i know an often asked question ... i happen to have a kona 3 card but it doesn't have any analog input capabilities. so the way i've captured vhs has been to simply to run it into my mini dv camera and record dv out from the camera through firewire. i think that's how most folks do it. works fine but i'm wondering if i'm losing some quality this way. does it make sense or does anyone convert the component analog out from the vhs deck to sdi which in my case can then be captured through kona. i guess canopus, black magic, and decklink make converters that do this. would i be gaining any quality this way? thanks.

    You have a grasp of the issues and no, you are not really losing anything by using the DV cam as a converter. VHS was such a sucky format to begin with, the only thing that really might help is to put a TBC between the VHS source and the A/DV converter to deal with any timing/chroma issues.
    The Canopus ADVC300 has a line TBC built in which does help some. It's not as effective as a frame TBC.
    x

  • For All Entries is NOT better than INNER JOIN in most cases

    I quote from Siegfried Boes' excellent post here: Will writing an inner join be better or creating a view?
    For all the FOR ALL ENTRIES lovers ... there is no proof for these reappearing recommendation.
    There is nearly nobody who receives forum points, who recommends FOR ALL ENTRIES instead of Joins. What is the reason ???
    It is easier to prove the opposite. A Join is a nested loop inside the database, a FOR ALL ENTRIES is partly outside of the database. FOR ALL ENTRIES works in blocks, joins on totals.
    FOR ALL ENTRIES are not recommded on really large tables, because the chances are too high that
    too many records are transferred.
    People prefer FOR ALL ENTRIES, because JOINs are not so easy to understand. Joins can go wrong, but with a bit of understanding they can be fixed.
    Some Joins are slow and can not be fixed, but then the FOR ALL ENTRIES would be extremely slow.
    There are several kinds of views:
    - projection views, i.e. only one table involved just fields reduced
    - join views, several tables, joins conditions stored in dictionary
    - materialized views, here the joined data are actually stored in the database. Storing and synchronisation has to be done manually.
    Only the last one creates real overhead. It should be the exception.
    Join Views and Joins are nearly identical. The view is better for reuse. The join is better in complicated, becuase if the access goes wrong, it can often be fixed by adding a hint. Hints can not be added to views.
    Abraham Bukit  points out:
    If it is cluster table, (you can't use join). If it is buffered table, I would also say avoid join.
    If they all are transaction table which are not buffered and are not cluster tables.  
    He further supports Siegfried's statement that FAE is easier to undestand than INNER JOINs.
    Thomas Zloch says, regarding buffered tables:
    At least think twice, maybe compare runtimes if in doubt. 
    So, unless someone has some EVIDENCE that FOR ALL ENTRIES is better, I don't think we want to see this discussed further.
    Kind regards
    Matt

    To give food for thought here's an example I  gave in a thread:
    If you have a statement like
    SELECT ... FOR ALL ENTRIES IN FAE_itab WHERE f = FAE_itab-f.
    SAP sends it to the database depending how the parameter rsdb/prefer_union_all is set:
    rsdb/prefer_union_all = 0 =>
    SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[1]-f
              OR    f = FAE_itab[2]-f
              OR    f = FAE_itab[N]-f
    You have some influence  of the generated statement type: Instead of OR'ed fields an IN list can be used
    if you have only a single coulmn N to compare:
    rsdb/prefer_in_itab_opt parameter:
    SELECT ... WHERE f IN (itab[1]-f, itab[2]-f, ..., itab[N]-f)
    rsdb/prefer_union_all = 1 =>
    SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[1]-f
    UNION ALL SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[2]-f
    UNION ALL SELECT ... WHERE f = FAE_itab[N]-f
    see: Note 48230 - Parameters for the SELECT ... FOR ALL ENTRIES statement
    As you can see for the 2nd parameter several statements are generated and combined with a UNION ALL,
    the first setting generates statements with OR's (or uses IN  if possible) for the entries in FAE_itab.
    I give you a little example here (my parameters are set in a way that the OR's are translated to IN lists; i traced the execution in ST05)
    Select myid into table t_tabcount from mydbtable
      for all entries in t_table    " 484 entries
        where myid = t_table-myid .
    ST05 trace:
    |Transaction SEU_INT|Work process no 0|Proc.type  DIA|Client  200|User |
    |Duration |Obj. name |Op.    |Recs.|RC    |Statement|
    | 640|mydbtable |PREPARE|   |  0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( :A0 , :A1 , :A2 , :A3 , :A4 ) AND "myid" = :A5|
    | 2|mydbtable |OPEN   |   |  0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
    | 2.536|mydbtable |FETCH  |    0|  1403|   |
    | 3|mydbtable |REOPEN |   |  0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
    | 118|mydbtable |FETCH  |  0|  |
    | 2|mydbtable |REOPEN |  |  0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ) AND "myid" = 72     |
    | 3|mydbtable |REOPEN |  |  0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 475 , 476 , 477 , 478 , 479 ) AND "myid" = 72  |
    | 94|mydbtable |FETCH  | 0| 1403|   |
    | 2|mydbtable |REOPEN |   |  0|SELECT WHERE "myid" IN ( 480 , 481 , 482 , 483 , 484 ) AND "myid" = 72 |
    You see the IN list contained 5 entries each , wich made up about 97 statements for all 484 entries.
    For every statment you have a single fetch operation wich means a separate access to the database.
    If you would replace the FAE with a join you would only have one fetch to the database.
    With the example above we can derive these observations:
    1. From database point of view these settings kill performance when you access a big table and/or have a lot of entries or columns in your FAE_itab. Furthermore, you hide information what data you will access
    at all and thus you block the database from creating a more efficient execution plan because it DOESN'T KNOW wich data you will select in the next step. I.e. it may be more efficient to scan the table in one shot instead of having many index accesses - but the database can make this decision only if it can examine ONE statement that has ALL the information of what data to retrieve.
    2. A second impact is that with every statement execution you trigger the allocation of database resources
    wich will contribute to the overhead described above.
    Said that, FAE  can never be a replacement for joining big tables (think of having a table with thousands of records in a FAE table )
    Edited by: kishan P on Nov 2, 2010 2:16 PM - Format Fixed

  • Hardware recommendation for a real-time camera

    Hi All,
    We are interested in using some cameras with LabVIEW real-time for some data acquisition. We are monitoring quite a large array of points for on/off signals (so a camera is easier to implement than an array of photodiodes). Our initial spec is a CCD, 640x480 chip and about 15fps. I'm guessing firewire or Gig-E as the interface as I've heard USB is not compatible with real-time.
    Our plan is to develop the application to run under LabVIEW real-time on a PXI platform. We also hope to eventually deploy the system so we'd prefer not to use NI Vision (I'm not sure if this is possible or not). Similarly due to cost we'd prefer not to use the Embedded/Compact Vision Systems if we can avoid it.
    Can anyone recommend a camera which they have used with LabVIEW real-time? I have no real experience with RT as yet so any advise at all would be a great help.
    We are also hoping to deploy the system using a cRIO as the main hardware platform. I've seen real-time cRIOs  (http://sine.ni.com/nips/cds/view/p/lang/en/nid/208042) have Gig-E built in. Has anyone used a Gig-E camera directly with one of these controllers?
    Thanks for your help,
    Dave

    Hello DeltaJ,
    Can I suggest that you contact the UK branch by calling 01635 523545 and request that you speak to you local Inside Sales Representative. They will be able to speak to you further regarding your full systems specifications and suggest which NI products will be best for you. 
    With regards,
    Message Edited by Philip.k on 03-09-2010 05:27 AM
    Philip
    Applications Engineer
    National Instruments
    UK Branch
    ===If this fixes your problem, mark as solution!===

  • Need Hardware Recommendations for FMS2

    I am having a FMS2 enabled site and application built and
    would like ideas on the best server setup/specs to run the site
    smoothly. I expect maximum users at any one time on the site at
    about 600 with about 400 concurrent FMS2 users. I will have 4
    "rooms" with one way video and audio feeds (1 to many) and as many
    as 100, (1 to 1) connections. Although I am more familiar with
    xServe, I would prefer to use Linux servers if possible. I have 100
    megs of local bandwidth for serving out the content. Am I better to
    go with fewer, more robust servers or more servers with less
    individual processing power? How much memory per server works best
    in your experience? Although Adobe's materials do dot suggest that
    load balancing is needed at my size, should I look into load
    balancing hardware anyway? All suggestions are most welcome.

    To come up with some working numbers, let's assume you'll
    have the following application instances running, and all of your
    audio/video streams are set at a bitrate of 128kbps:
    A) 4 rooms with 1 to many broadcast, each with a single
    broadcaster being viewed by 100 people -and-
    B) 100 2 way chat rooms, each having two users both
    sending/receiving audio and video
    For part A, we'll have a total of 404 streams (400 receiving
    and 4 broadcasting). At 128kbps, your 404 streams will consume
    about 50Mbps of bandwidth.
    For part B, we'll have a total of 400 streams (100 rooms each
    with two broadcasting streams and two receiving streams), so,
    there's another 50Mbps.
    So, we have a total of 804 streams consuming 100mbps...
    assuming you stick with 128kbps. If your video will be sized at
    160x120, you might get away with that bitrate, but if you want a
    larger image, you'll likely want to increase the video rate to
    265kbps or better.
    Given the volume, I'd opt to deploy the app across two, or
    maybe even three servers if the budget allows (single processor
    Xeon machines with 2gb of RAM should do nicely).
    For you OS choice, FMS is rock solid on RHEL 3.

  • Hardware recommendations for a newbie

    After many long and frustrating years at the hands of PC and MS I will soon be purchasing an iMac (it seems to be a world of bliss in comparison to my current setup!)
    Soon after the iMac (2.4GHz, 1GB RAM, Mac OS X v10.4.10) I will be purchasing an audio interface and midi controller for use with GB8 and perhaps later with ProTools. I generally do home recording with guitars, mic and some midi, no more than 2-4 tracks at a time. I would like the option of portable (ie USB or Firewire for a laptop when required). Looking at keeping the spending on both items to aproximately Aust$500 (US$400) each.
    Do any of you kind folks have some ideas as to stable and compatible hardware which would suit my needs and also offer the versatility of using within other applications (ProTools) at a later date?
    At this stage the PreSonus Firebox has been recommended to me as a suitable Interface for my needs, the M-Audio 410 has been stated as having driver probs.
    In regards to midi controllers have looked at M-Audio Axiom49, however some have stated that is not a simple plugnplay as some other options.
    Would sincerely appreciate your ideas and suggestions to get me on the way.
    Many Thanks

    As far as Quality and just all around "Goodness", you can't go wrong with PreSonus, they make GREAT hardware (I use a FirePod). I'm not sure about being bus powered though, someone else will have to comment on that (or you'll need to do a bit more research)
    Here's a jumping off point:
    http://www.bulletsandbones.com/GB/Interfaces.html
    For a Controller, check of out the first one listed here (It's the one I have), pure plug and play:
    http://www.bulletsandbones.com/GB/MIDIControllers.html

  • Hardware recommendations for learning Solaris Cluster on Sparc (at home)

    On a low budget, I'd like to put together a Solaris Cluster on Sparc (at home). At "work" in the next year we will be implementing a Solaris Cluster to run Tomcat and a custom CORBA server. (These apps will be migrated from very old hardware and VCS) The CORBA server is a Sparc binary, hence the need for Sparc. I'd like my home-office cluster to be similar in function to what I have at work. At work we have (2) T5120 Servers and a 2540 (2500-M2) Array waiting. From looking at the Solaris Cluster docs, it looks like you use a 2540 in a Direct-Connect configuration. We will be going to Solaris Cluster training eventually, but not soon. In the meantime, I'd like to keep/gain some skills/experience.
    Potential (cheap) Home Cluster:
    (2) SunFire V245 or (2) T1000 or (2) something_cheap
    connected to
    (1) Storedge D2 or (1) Storedge S1
    My main desire, is for the interconnects and failover on this Home Cluster to behave the same way as the T5120s with the 2540 Array. Example, if I yank a HD (or replace) then I'd like it to give very similar messages to what I will face at work in the future. I'd like the creation of ZFS pools etc to work similarly. I'd like SCSI cards (HBAs or whatever) and cabling to be cheap.
    Any recommendations on hardware> Servers? Arrays? SCSI Cards/cabling?
    Thanks,
    Scott

    I settled on:
    (2) Sunfire V210
    Storedge 3120
    Connected by VHDCI
    All used equipment at a cheap price. Should be a great little testbed.

Maybe you are looking for