Raid decision

I have a 2009 8 core nehalem mac pro, 16Gb ram with 1 x640Gb HD (startup disk) and 3 x 1Tb sata in the remaining bays. I am generating 20 to 50Gb of raw images a week and would like to implement a system for ensuring continuous data survival within the machine should a drive fail (i back it up to an external server as well). I am a little confused as to which is the best RAID solution for me. i initially thought that RAID 1 (mirroring) would be best but have now read a little more which indicates that raid 5 might be better (i.e you do not get the "wasted" drive space over head that accompanies RAID 1).
Any thoughts?
My original plan was to try and do this with softraid but (SFAIK) this only supports RAID 0 and 1, so maybe i have to get a hardware controller. If a hardware RAID card is required which is best/cheapest?
many thanks for help in advance.

RAID Backup
I would hop on over to AMUG and read some reviews, Barefeats, and consider what you want to spend and expect.
I see no fault with using SoftRAID with a mirror of all three drives, along with backups and archives, to RAID6 and to single drives in hot swap cases.

Similar Messages

Working photographer needs help with hard drives and raid O decisions

Hi new here and also new to Mac well almost new been 20 years since i had a mac. i have a Mac Pro Book and this led to ordering the MacPro since I am a working photographer i made a complete switch in platforms so i have some questions and such but I did place a order on Friday for a 2.66 4gbs of Ram , 2 500 gb hard drive and a 30 in monitor and of course the ATI 1900 XT card so yes i am waiting like many for that card.
I put initial 4gb of ram since running CS2 will at least take a max of 3gb's in the memory cache . i plan on getting 2gbs more from OWC since that seems to be the only 3rd party ram at the moment that is working correctly from reading some of the threads here. Having 6gbs is a no brainer really given the amount of Raw processing that i do along with PS work plus having e-mail and other apps open at the same time. The ram to me is the easy part although expensive . My biggest issue is what to do with the 2 hard drive slots and Raid O or not but I will start a thread on that. But i will have 6gbs total for now and the bottom line is you can never have enough ram still holds true.
Now on to my diliemma with hard drives. I did have a raid O scsi 10k rapture and and 10 k scratch on my Dell box and I am just not sure what to do here. i ordered the 2 500 gb hard drive and I may just put them on the storage side of things than get 2 WD 150gb 10 k Sata drives. Now i could Raid O them for 300 gb and get a performace boast that way or i could keep them seperate and put everything on 1 150 drive and ue the second for scratch only. What i don't know is what Mac perfers and what works better. Not worried so much about failure of drives, thats just life in the big city stuff and you just have backups. What i more worried about is performance versus a waste . seems to me that Raid O may not even be needed with these new Intel boxes with all the horsepower going on. Now the other think I notice is the WD 150gb 10 k drives are 1.5 and not 3.0 so is it really faster than the 7200 3.0 single hard drives. I read barefeats shoot out and it seems just getting the right drives in 7200 and Raid O them maybe the answer.
Okay i am not the biggest geek on the planet but I do know my stuff but this is a area that i look for more knowledge on this. So if i can get some sound advice in this area. i know there are many photographers out there like me pushing hundreds of images that could use the same advice. Now let's leave the money end out , folks sometimes think more with there wallet than what works best not that I am opposed to saving money but after spending over 7 k already on this system it becomes a moot point. LOL
www.guymancusophoto.com

Ok your question is if you should RAID O the two 150GB Raptors or not.
I think it was wise for you to get a couple of them for a boot drive with "Time Machine" coming in the next version of Mac OS X. The second drive would make a excellent bootable backup and eliminating downtime if a boot drive dies on you one morning.
In fact any boot drive cloning software that is Mac Intel ready now would do you good.
Now Barefeats has run some tests, and I can pretty much back up what they say from my own experience.
Mac OS X and apps can be helped only so much by a faster boot drive, and a single 10,000 RPM Raptor is enough, RAID O a pair is overkill.
If you install everything on the boot Raptor and keep your space hogging files (except iTunes) in new folders on another drive, even a 7,200 RPM 500GB, the two drives combined is faster as there is nearly no wait. Both drives can be accessed at the same time. Keeping the boot drive slim keeps the stylus (arm) moving as little as possible to get all the small reads/writes Mac OS X needs.
I RAID O-ed my boot drives because 74GB was the largest they had at the time, so combining them gave me speed and larger storage. I hardly use the speed, it only comes in handy if by rare chance I duplicate a 20GB folder, then I can do it in half the time of a 7,200 RPM drive.
Some of the drawbacks of a RAID O set, especially as a boot drive is that I have to auto-clone the whole set to a external drive regularly (I actually do a couple). Since the data path is separated with a RAID O, any drive failure results in total data loss.
So if you RAID O those 150GB Raptors, your going to have to clone 300GB to a external drive (or another internal) regularly, like once a week. This will take considerable time and you can't use the machine while the cloning process is going on. Sure auto-cloning software like DeJaVu can be used at night/weekends, but why bother cloning more than you have to for no big speed increase?
However if your messing with huge Photoshop files that spill over your CS2 3GB RAM limit (you need to have a "scratch" thats as fast as RAM), duplicating large files and other heavy duty drive work, then a boot RAID O will come in handy. Just remember your initial performance of 185 MB p/s will drop about 20-25% when those drives are 3/4 filled. Still 140 MB p/s is extremely good and a no worry situation.
What is worrysome is anything below 80MB p/s (I'm talking uncached 4K write speeds under X-Bench) with a new boot drive and then as time elaspes that boot drive gets filled up and loses half or more of it's inital speed. 30 MB p/s is really slow. Beachball H&LL.
http://www.barefeats.com/hard33b.html
Do Erase W/Zero in Disk Utility all new drives before laying data on them. Drives get subjected to shock which causes bad sectors on the drive. Driver software uses your data as a guinea pig to test the sectors (which you might not be able to recover the file). Zeroing does this without your data, rewriting the bad sector map so your writes are much improved, OS is more stable. etc.

3rd Party RAID Card options - must make a decision

I've been on the Mac with NLE for high end corporate work since early 90's but only now moving from a 10 bit uncompressed SD edit suite to FCP and I need your valued feedback for a Mac Pro arriving soon. I've spent hours poring over all forums, Apple and otherwise, to select the right raid solution. The situation is that we will edit NTSC into 2009 and make the transition to HD later in the year. So, the initial set-up will be three 1 TB Seagate 7200.11's with a 320GB for O/S (and perhaps more in optical bay for scratch, etc.) I prefer to install the three video drives internally and go with a hardware driven card (Raid 5) that also provides support for external drives if we add later. Caldigit's is the only card that appears to cover all the misc. requirements but the forums list issues with 3rd party storage vs Caldigit's box. Other cards have pros and cons so I'm asking you to tell me what is working in your shop and also whether I should just purchase a 3rd party external enclosure and set up the Seagates there. If so, card recommendation is also critical.

Hi,
I find installing a RAID 5 inside the Mac Pro has too many limitations. I would rather keep the boot drive in its own internal bay and be able to mount a boot camp disk or other backup disks internally when needed.
A better solution for most users is to mount the RAID 5 externally. The FirmTek SeriTek/5PM enclosure and the HighPoint RocketRAID 2314 combination provides a high quality external RAID 5 solution that is quiet, fast and dependable. You can learn more about it here:
http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/firmtek/5pm/
http://www.firmtek.com/seritek/seritek-5pm/
http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/highpoint/2314/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000NAXGIU/arizomacinusergr
There are other solutions that work well too. However, the controllers tend to be much more expensive. RAID 5 users looking for a quality solution at a very reasonable price will find the SeriTek/5PM and RR2314 combination works well.
If you don't mind paying more the Areca ARC-1680ix-12 SAS controller reviewed by AMUG is another high performance option that works well with SATA direct connect enclosures. You can read more about it here:
http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/areca/1680ix12/
Have fun!

MSI KT3 Ultra ARU, HD on RAID or not?

I'm rebuilding my computer with WinXP Pro. I have a single HD, CD-ROM, CD-RW, and Zip 100 drives along with a FDD.
When the machine was Win98SE I had the single HD connected to the on-board RAID controller and all worked fine.
I blew away all the partitions so I could use NTFS - but encountered an error during XP's setup. It got to the point of formatting the C: partition - but after reaching 100% it gave an error that it couldn't complete the format.
Talked to a friend of mine and he suggested I move the HD to one of the non-RAID IDE controllers. He thought that would play nicer with XP Pro's setup.
Is there any performance advantage/disadvantage to putting the HD on the RAID controller? Will I encounter any problems if I move one of the CD drives and/or the Zip drive from the non-RAID IDE controllers to the RAID controller?
Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

I read the information above - but after following the instructions and trying to start XP Pro I get a BSOD after the WinXP splash screen.
So...thought I'd try to update the BIOS, etc. and then try again. Downloaded the latest BIOS from MSI's site - but cannot get the BIOS flashed. Followed the instructions below - but after I boot with a Win98 Boot disk the C: drive is not accessible. When I boot from a DOS boot disk made from WinXP the C: drive is not available either.
Grrr.....!
AMI Flash BIOS Procedure
Check your BIOS for BIOS FLASH Protection & DISABLE it, some boards have this function.
For Example:
K7T266 Pro (MS-6380) -BIOS setup/chipset setup/BIOS protection/disabled
Know Your model number
a. Open your case and look for the MS-XXXX number on the motherboard between the PCI slots, also check the version number that is written there as well. (some motherboards are named like K7T Turbo, make sure you have the right version number)
b. Boot up your system & take a look at the top left screen during POST, you should see something like "A6380MS v1.7 122101" This means the board is MS-6380 with BIOS version 1.7
Hint : Many systems are clearing this message very fast, the bios version is then unreadable, you can either press "PAUSE" or disable the "Quick Boot" in the BIOS setup.
Download the BIOS that matches your motherboard AND version number (some motherboards are named like K7T Turbo, make sure you have the right version number). BIOS can be found according to the CPU type of your board like if your CPU is Intel P4 478 type then look here
if you cannot find the BIOS that matches your board, try here
Extract the BIOS-archive that you have downloaded by double clicking to c:\test
Boot your system from a Win98 or WinME boot-floppy.
How to make boot floppy in case your don't have it ready:
For Win9X, You can type [C:\ format a:/s] from the DOS prompt.
For WinMe, You can make a boot floppy from control panel--> add/remove program-->make boot floppy. Remove autoexec.bat & config.sys file if there's any.
For Win2000, there's no way to make boot floppy, so you have to either use Win9X or WinME boot floppy.
For WinXP, you can make a DOS boot disk. Go to Your Computer, right click drive A:, select Format, select copy system files.
When you get the A:\ prompt, type the following sequence:
C:
cd\test
C:\test> amifl827 a6380vms.330
(a6380vms.330 refers to BIOS file, this will depend on the board model)
(to save or not to save old BIOS is the user's decision)

Using Time Machine to Backup an External Drive (RAID 1)

Is it possible to backup an external drive to another external drive using Time Machine in Mountain Lion?
The following diagram describes what I want to do. I am basically trying to use Time Machine as an external RAID 1 system. However, I don't want to buy a RAID 1 box. I want to have control of TWO OR MORE time machine setups. I don't want to backup my OS every time. I simply want to backup one external drive to another external drive. The drives are 2TB each, so the advice to buy a big hard drive to back everything up on won't work. Also, I am often swapping drives and would like to use this system for all of my projects and all of my drives. Any help would be great. Thanks for your time.
NOTE: I am on Lion and wanted to know if this was possible before upgrading.

To be clear, TM can back up your external drive perfectly well, provided it's in MacOS format. What it can't do is back up the external drive alone to one destination, and everything else to a different destination.
As for what you should use instead of TM, I don't really have an opinion. SuperDuper and Carbon Copy Cloner are well regarded. You need to make some decisions about backup strategy before you choose a backup method. TM makes incremental backups, so you can revert to any of several earlier versions of a file. Those third-party products can do that too, though not as efficiently as TM. Also bear in my mind that a single backup is inadequate. You need more than one backup to be safe, and to be truly safe, at least one backup must be stored off-site at all times.

Raid 0 Failure! XP Pro won't read array on MSI k7T266 pro2 *URGE

Before anything else, thanks for reading and I hope you can help:
I have an MSI k7T266 Pro2A-RU motherboard with 512MB of Mushkin RAM, AMD XP 1600+, a Geforce2 MX400, Audigy Soundcard and a cheap PCI NIC card. I consider myself an above average technician and I've come up on a problem I can't figure out. There is about 80GB of data at stake here:
I have 2 IBM Deskstar 40GB 7200 RPM drives that were configured in a RAID 0 (stripe) configuration over a year and a half ago. This gave me a total of 80GB online. Windows XP Professional was installed and the drives have been running fine every since...
The system was practically bulletproof and it was very rare it ever locked up for any reason. A few days ago, however, the system locked up about 4 or five times. There was no software or hardware that had been added or installed and system use hadn't really changed up or down. I run up to date antivirus software (Command Anti-Virus), run behind a secure firewall and watch what I open. The lock ups were random, but happened when I was away from the computer. ( I leave my system on all the time).
Being a bit paranoid, on 1/28/03, I acquired an 80GB Maxtor drive to install to back up my datafiles. Before the install, I notice the system had locked up at least once that day, so I figured I would hurry up and get the drive in to back up. I installed the 80, booted, configured it in XP and made it active and transfered a few test files over. No problem. I made the decision to back up my data files before bed and continued to work for the next two hours. The system ended up locking up with a windows blue screen STOP error message: KERNEL_FAULT_INPAGE_ERROR when I tried to run a program. Thinking little of it, I rebooted the computer to find I could no longer access the data on the RAID.
I've tried nearly EVERYTHING I can think of. (You can already assume I've done the basics (check/replace the cables, etc). Here's a list and the results:
---- Reboot in all available modes (Safe, Safe with NW, Normal, Last known, etc). They all FAIL. In safe modes, you can see where the system actually tries to boot off the array (runs through driver files and stops on MUP.SYS) and hangs. Same result with all other drives removed except the RAID.
---- Installed another drive, loaded XP with the raid controller files (By the way, it's a Promise ATA 100 "lite" controller), plugged the RAID back in and it hangs on boot up. Safe mode gives the same results. Tried the same thing with Windows 2000 (so I could access the NTFS partition) and Windows 2000 won't load when the array is plugged in, but loads ok when it isn't (used the 2000 driver for the RAID controller for this attempt). Safe mode gives the same results.
---- Removed all drives except the Array and tried to reload XP (with the array drivers downloaded again from the site.) No effect. System hangs.
---- In a last ditch effort, I have access to Winternals Administration Pack 2002 of all of their tools. ERC Commander, designed for this type of problem, Disk Commander, and the other tools all do the same thing: Any time the system attempts to read from or access the arry, the OS will hang. It won't even check for NTFS compatibility in the ERC commander program booting from a boot CD, and for those that are familiar with it, the Disk Commander program blue screens with a STOP: 0x000007B (0xF896963C, 0xC0000034, 0x0, 0x0) error. Research has told me this is an INACCESSABLE BOOT DEVICE message.
These are the main highlight major attempt things and there's a few things in between I've tried (like using Norton Ghost to try and mirror the array to the 80GB. Norton ghost said there is an error reading the partition and can't go any further (Returns an Internal error))
I'm at the point where I have run out of available options and don't know what else to try. I have since purchased the exact same motherboard off e-bay to see if it just so happens to be the controller and to see if my RAID will come back so I can at least read the data off of it. It should be here in a few days. If that doesn't work, I'm toasted. Could I be fighting a hardware (drive or board or controller) problem. Is the array THAT corrupt the OS can't read it???
If anyone has any other bright ideas, I'm willing to try about anything short of damaging the array. Any help is greatly appreciated. Please post here, or e-mail to [email protected].
BTW, the Promise BIOS is Fasttrak 100 "Lite" v 1.31.1(Build 30)
Thanks.
- Chuck! ?( ;( ;( ;( ;( ?(

got one but its lightley used for storage but amd forum storage is full of tales of woe with them
type deskstar and problems in goggle for a laugh

External firewire 800 disk: Raid or non Raid?

Hi all,
I am currently about to by a new external firwire 800 hard disk to replace my firewire 400 200GB Maxtor. I mainly use this disk for timemachine backups and all my final cut express scratch area and work area. I am working with AVCHD video and looking to expand the storage and speed of this disk. I have narrowed my options down to two. They are both high quality options. I will be buying the enclosure and hard disks seperatly to ensure I get a good enclosure and good quality hard disk drive.
Enclosure options:
1. http://www.macpower.com.tw/products/hdd3/pleiades/pd_scombo.
Pleiades Super S-Combo, FireWire 400/800, USB 2.0, and eSATA interfaces. This enclosure uses Oxford 934DSb or Oxford 924DSb chipset. This is a single drive enclosure and non Raid. I would put a 1TB disk in this enclosure.
2. http://www.macpower.com.tw/products/hddmulti/taurus/pdd_raid2
Taurus Raid II enclosure. FireWire 400/800, USB 2.0 and USB 1.0 interfaces. This enclosure uses Oxford 934DSb or Oxford 924DSb chipset. This is a dual drive enclosure and Raid 0 and 1. I would put a two 500GB disks in this enclosure. But will use with mirroring such that a copy of data will reside on each disk. Whilst this will reduce the overal capacity to 500GB I will have the extra redundancy should a drive fail. From which I can just replace the failed drive.
I am aware that using Raid mirroring will slow down the data transfer to the disk enclosure but I think this should be ok for AVCHD editing for my purposes. Cost wise there is not much difference between the two options. In both options I will go for either Seagate Baracuda drive or Samsung Spinpoint.
Would like to know what your thoughts are?
Which options would you go for?
Message was edited by: Just-Karma

Hi all,
Ok so I decided to not go done the raid mirriring route. Instead I finally made a decision and boughts a Macpower FW800 enclousre which uses the Oxford 934 chipset and a Samsung HD103UJ 1TB Serial ATA 3.0 Gbps
buffer memory32 MB hard disk.
The enclosure is excellent quality and the disk access is very quick via FW800. The disk itself is very quiet and also great for Final Cut with my HD editing. Only noise the disk makes is upon power up other than that it is very quiet.
I have partitioned th disk into two 500GB's. One partition is used for time machine backups and the other is the Final Cut scratch space.
I plan to buy another enclosure and 1TB disk and parition into two 500GB's also. I plan to use one of the 500GB's for Super Duper clone of iMac system hard disk and the second for cloning/backing up the scratch Final Cut space. This second disk and enclosure will be my offline backup system and will not be powered all the time.
Details of the elcousre and hard disk are provided below. I purchased them in the UK. Enclosure was purchased from www.span.com and hard disk from www.ebuyer.com. Whilst span can sell disks in the enclosure you can save yourself a little money and buy seperatly from ebuyer and install yourself.
Enclosure:
http://www.macpower.com.tw/products/hdd3/pleiades/pd_scombo
Hard disk:
http://www.samsung.com/global/business/hdd/productmodel.do?group=72&type=61&subt ype=63&model_cd=249&tab=fea

About to buy a new Macbook Pro, decisions...

I have been reading all the discussions I could find pertinent, over the last couple weeks... Many different points of view, different ways to go... I've had Macs since the Mac Plus first came out... Presently a 17" MacBook Pro I've had since 2006... It seems it's time to go forward... :-)
First question is to get an Apple installed SSD or a third party SSD.. I think I sort of grok the pros and cons both ways, and would definitely like to save the money if it results in a machine as least as solid as Apple's with their SSD... I'm quite comfortable switching out the HD for an SSD and putting the HD into an enclosure, first putting the SSD into the same enclosure to format and install Mountain Lion onto it... I want the optical drive, so putting the HD there is not an option... Also creating a boot disk with a flash drive, so can boot and set the SSD as the startup, as well as have a boot disk around... Also running TRIM install software, seemingly understanding the real need to do that for the benefit of the SSD long term... I realize no one can tell me what I want, there in the final moment of ordering, so to speak... But any direct thoughts on this decision in the meantime would be more than welcome...
Second question, which third party SSD to buy, not size necessarily, but manufacturer... aprox 256GB, possibly up... And specifically for the new 15" MB Pro, NOT Retina, with a link to a particular SSD, if it is possible... I ask that because I've looked at the Crucial site, and what they recommend for the new 15", and their # on it doesn't seem to match Crucial's manufacturer numbers on sites like OWC, J&R, etc... Got me confused... Any help on this greatly appreciated... Criteria for me in order of importance are quality (durability) and reliability, costs, speed... With quality and reliability including its interface with the new MB Pro as a third party SSD... Any other thoughts more than welcome...
Third question, which ram upgrade (16 GB possibly 8 GB), re manufacturer again, and specifically of course for the new 15"... Same criteria as above... I understand that 1.35 volts could be important, enough at least for me now that that is what I think I want to get... Interestingly MacConnection"s ram specs don't show the voltage,... Other places do... So again, which particular ones, and again links would be hugely appreciated...
Thanks ,
John.

The 15" will be fine ... the lack of ExpressCard slot means you have limited expansion options eg no way to add fast eSATA storage, but for your web production needs then the limited options should not cause any great impact. If you need I/O then there are firewire based options out there. If you need broadcast quality monitoring then you could use the Matrox MXO solution. For high speed dedicated storage you can use a FireWire 800 based drive or RAID.
Best
Andy

RAID questions

I have a couple of questions on Raid. According to Danny, ICH5R is not hardware raid. This question was risen in my last post "Help creating partitions in RAID 0 volume", because it seems Partiton Magic only works with hardware raid. Also, I got the impression that a RAID 0 volume can only be created in a Dynamic Disk. However, Windows disk manager shows my Raid 0 volume as being a Basic disk. I'm confused. My questions:
- Does software in general recognize my Raid setup as being software raid (ICH5R)?
- Is it true that there is little gain in speed with software raid?
- Why does my raid volume show up as being a basic disk?
- How much does it cost a TRUE hardare raid controller? Any decisive advantages over my mobo's ICH5R?
- As anyone used Partion Magic for partitoning Raid volumes using software raid?
I've been serching the web for answers but I've found more contradictions than answers Any help is appreciated. Thanks

I can't answer all your questions but here's a start.
Theoretically, the ICH5R has twice the bandwidth of the PCI bus so should be faster. In practice, most people with FIS2R boards have found the Promise controller a little quicker. It seemed a little faster for me as well but it wasn't a huge difference and I suspect it depends on what you're using it for. As for hardware/software issues, I don't know. I do know that I got hard drive performance increases of between 30 and 70% on both Raid controllers compared to a single drive depending on which benchmark program I used and the type of test. I also found that Partition Magic 8 seems to function properly using the boot floppy with either the Intel or Promise Raid controller. I also use Drive Image 7 which comes with a boot CD and it works with both Raids as well. I have learned the hard way not to use any features where you make changes in Windows and the program then boots automatically into DOS to make changes and then boots into Windows again. If the program is not completely compatible with the 865/875 chipset(I doubt any can promise that yet), it will hang in Dos mode and you're stuck with a Dos partition at the beginning of your C drive. So I like to boot these programs from a floppy/CD.
I'm not satisfied yet that the Raid0 config is really stable so I have WinXP installed on a single SATA in the Intel controller and a Raid0 array on the Promise controller for all my media/Games. I also put my pagefile on the Raid. This allows me to load game levels/movies/large images etc... quickly and keep my OS a little safer. After Windows loads, it doesn't access the XP drive much anyway with 1GB of memory. Then I just periodically save important media/game saves on the XP drive or CD and use drive image to save the OS on the Raid drive.
Hope that helps answer some of your questions.

Urgent: Advice needed for buying my first RAID

Hi,
I am looking to place an order today as I have a pile of editing to get through - so I would love to hear your recommendations!
First of all I am a networking and RAID newbie so don't go all acronym and geek-speek-tastic on me or I won't have a clue what you are talking about. Seriously I don't know my NAS from my elbow!
My requirements are:
1. Suitable for working with HDV
2. 2TB of storage
3. Must work with PowerMac G5 2GHz Dual (later model)
4. Must support RAID 5
5. RAID must be controlled by hardware (on RAID box or via PCIe card)
The following have been suggested - has anyone used them?:
Opt1: http://www.enhance-tech.com/products/desktop/t4_cr.html
(Would probably need to put an eSATA card in my Mac but RAID control is on the box.
Only goes to 80MB/sec - is this good enough for working with ProRes 422? I am looking to convert my HDV to ProRes 422 before output to mpeg2 as I believe this can give better results.)
Opt2: http://www.g-technology.com/Products/G-SPEED-eS.cfm
(Would need to put a RAID controller in my Mac so not so good for connecting to other Macs.)
But I found this and was wondering if it was also suitable (as its cheaper!):
Opt3: http://www.thecus.com/products_over.php?cid=11&pid=28&PHPSESSID=091b7808cfa54754 383932fc512ea056
(Would connect by 1Gb/sec ethernet to my Mac. RAID controller on the box. Someone said stay away from ethernet but I don't understand why?).
Any advice gratefully received. I need to make a decision real quick!
Keep it mellow, B.

It appears that you need to step back and rethink your business. Heck, we don’t even know that you have a business. What you’re up to might just be personal editing. So I apologize if what I’m about to say overestimates you or underestimates you.
FORMAT
You say, “suitable for working with HDV”, but you don’t say whether you MUST work with HDV. As others in this thread have pointed out, HDV is a “poor man’s Hi-Def”. It compresses images so diabolically in Long GOP that image quality suffers, and, as Shane points out, “the long GOP format is very complex and takes a LOT of time to do things.”
The other extreme is recording and editing in 1080i/p at 4K. Very few people in this world demand extreme quality. So, the best format overall is DVCPro HD. Today, DVCPro HD cameras cost only about a third more than the next nearest HDV. What’s more important, to me, is that DVCPro allows you to move away from having to use tape at all. It’s the year 2008 (almost). Tape is over. If it’s too late to sell your camera and switch, then so be it.
STORAGE
You say, “2TB of storage”. For HD work, that’s a bare minimum. My recommendation is to get a 4-tray or 5-tray box with room to grow, even though the extra trays will remain empty your first 6-12 months.
Buy an empty enclosure that you can populate with your own drives. That way, you can use 1TB bare drives. (Don’t buy anything smaller.) You can put together a stack of 5 1TB drives in an eSATA RAID box for less than $2,000.
RAID
You say, “PowerMac G5 2GHz Dual...via PCIe card”. You mean PCIx card. PCIe is for Intel Macs.
You write, “I want RAID (esp. RAID 5... If a drive fails I want to simply be able to swap a new drive in, restore, and be under way again.” But several of your comments indicate that you really don’t need in-line failsafe. For that reason, let me recommend mirroring or something even simpler: a backup drive.
JBOD (Just a Bunch Of Disks) treats each drive in your stack as a separate volume. So, what you see on your desktop is Drive_01, Drive_02. If you subtract the cost for the RAID controller (in the box or in your PCI slot), you can afford to buy TWO plain JBOD boxes, and maintain one as redundant. That satisfies your, “If a drive fails I want to simply be able to swap a new drive in, restore, and be under way again.” In fact, you can skip the “restore” part.
Ken Summerall wrote: “If you are shooting HDV then you have the tapes, those are your backups. If a drive goes down you recapture.”
You responded, “that is not the same as having redundancy of data - and simply being able to swap in a new drive and do a restore.”
You make it sound as though you expect this to happen once a week. It won’t. Backup is good enough. That kind of “time saved” once every year or two isn’t worth it.
SATA vs. FIREWIRE
Again, it’s the year 2008 (almost). Why would you want FireWire? Apple is being so stubborn, pretending that eSATA does not exist, because it has so much invested in its FW technology. But even Apple will be forced to come around in its next models.
While we’re talking about it, the claimed 80MB/sec for the Enhance T4 CR probably refers to the FireWire and USB interfaces, not to the SATA.
ENCLOSURE SHARING
You write, “I also wanted to use the same RAID box with a Macbook Pro. So how would two Macs share the same RAID box?
What kind of sharing do you mean? If you mean that you and your partner can access the same video simultaneously in adjoining rooms, then you need FibreChannel. But, as Shane points out, “...a Fibrechannel setup, then an XServe Server...is NOT cheap.”
As Ken writes, “You can get a eSata card for your G5 and an ExpressCard for your MBP and share the box. With this you could get a Kona or Blackmagic card and capture your footage as DVCProHD and also have a way to monitor your HDV footage.”
Amen.
VENDORS
G-SPEED is reliable, with good support. Caldigit has a platinum reputation. Of course, there are MaxxDigital, Sonnet and Dulce Systems.
Enhance is the new kid on the block, and they are significantly less expensive with, in my experience so far, excellent build quality and quick (human) response. They manufacture in Taiwan, but they’re headquartered in -- and ship out of -- Lower California. So they don’t talk to you in Taiwanese as the cheap enclosure sites do.
So there.
Message was edited by: Al Hatch

What RAID storage system should I use?

To set the stage here. I'm somewhat of a newbie to the video industry. I've worked as a videographer for a non-profit for 5 years. At that job, we just skimped by on what we could afford, which wasn't much. I just started a new "professional level" job for a school district and have been given the keys to a fairly substantial budget to get whatever I need to do the job.
I want to do right by them and not waste money, so I want my purchase decisions to be educated. I'm an intermediate computer user, but have never used raid configurations before, so please be kind. Also, we can really only purchase through a few vendors. B&H is where I'm getting all my other video equipment, so I'm only looking at options available there for my storage needs as well.
Right now we record using Canon XA10 and XA20 model cameras. I'm hoping to upgrade to XF300's with this new budget, but still we're only talking MXF files, 1920x1080 at 50Mbps 4:2:2. So I'm not dealing with huge uncompressed footage.
Still I record a fair amount of footage. In the first 2 months on the job I've accumulated about 460GB of raw video, and I don't expect demand to go down in the future.
Right now, my idea is to purchase two Western Digital 12TB Raid Arrays in Raid 0.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1053138-REG/wd_wdblwe0120jch_nesn_12tb_my_book_duo.h tml
(I should note, I'm using a Windows 7 PC, so I only have access to USB 3.0, not Thunderbolt)
The first raid array would be my scratch disk, the second would be used for manual backup at the end of every day. (Using a utility like SyncBack)
Once my projects are complete, and I'm sure I won't need to access them, I'd like to move them off to a 3rd RAID array like this set up in Raid 5 for redundancy.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018063-REG/owc_other_world_computing_mercury_qx2_4_ by_hw.html#specOWCM3QX2K0GB
This array would serve primarily as an archival unit, with only occasional transfers to it and use in only rare circumstances where I need access to several month old footage.
Do you have any suggestions of a better system or workflow?
Thanks so much!

Would be good to raise this over on the:
Hardware Forum ...
https://forums.adobe.com/community/premiere/hardware_forum
Neil

RAID is not an option/not available/missing in BIOS Storage Options?? HP Envy 700-047c

Hello - I have an HP Envy 700-047c. It came with a 2 TB HD. I put in another 2 TB HD same model/type. The system in the BIOS and Windows 8 sees the new drive. However, when I boot and go into F10 BIOS/HP Setup utility, go to Storage menu, select Storage Options, my only option is SATA Emulation and the only 2 select options it shows are AHCI and IDE. This is where I should see RAID option - it is not there.
I tried changing SATA ports on the motherboard - no help.
I tried disabling Secure Boot and UEFI and chose Legacy - no help.
I updated to latest BIOS for this PC - no help.
I installed Intel Rapid Storage Technology software and can see the 2 drives within Windows but there is no create option on the Status page like there should be (because you need to enable RAID in the BIOS which the option is missing).
I looked on the motherboard and don't see any jumpers that are labeled RAID (ie. some physical trip).
I called Intel and they confirmed the Intel chipset I have is RAID capable but to contact HP to see if they turned off. I contacted HP and twice they said they are not trained in RAID and do not support it. I contacted the local Microcenter tech support and they found a link on this website talking about how to go to the area I'm in - but the RAID option is not there.
Does anyone know how to get RAID enabled on this HP 700-047c in the BIOS/Setup utility? Help!

UPDATE BY ORIGINAL POSTER TO BELOW - The below is not accurate about RAID being disabled on "All" HP home line computers per research from Big_Dave (Thanks!) - It is what I was told by the HP Escalation Team Friday however - not just my MB but all - which we are seeing is not correct per the customizable Envy model in the following post. It may just be certain models or just my current model's MB...?? I struck thru some of the detail, but leaving it mostly intact so others can see the misinformation I was given.
Thanks for passing along. Below is what I found out about how RAID is disabled by HP now.
I also had an email going back and forth with HP support and they sent to HP Escalation team who I ended up talking with yesterday who researched it for a day and found out that HP has disabled RAID on the motherboard for all of their home PC line! As we were thinking above. Only servers can do RAID now is the word. Hard to believe they'd do that. The rep said he believed it had to do with people calling HP when they lost data due to setting up using RAID 0 and thinking that protected them (all it does is make a big disk, no redundancy like RAID 1).
To me that is no reason to turn off a feature of the Intel chipset. They also don't make this clear to any HP employee as no one I've talked to (3 now along with chat and email) knew that HP is crippling the capabilities of the MB and chipset. I even have a several year old HP Pavilion that has RAID enabled on it under my desk and has saved me twice from disk failure (running RAID 1 mirroring).
I'm pretty disappointed with HP decision to do this and that it's poorly recorded (in fact not recorded at all) it so that I wasted hours upon days trying to figure it out with tech support people. If HP wants to remove a much needed service such as RAID it should be mandatory for them to disclaim that right in the Specfications sheet. RAID IS DISABLED AND CANNOT BE TURNED ON ON ANY HP HOME CONSUMER COMPUTER.
Note: I even called AMI (American Megatrend, Inc.) with HP on the line who said they sold the MB to HP fully capable of RAID which is what led the escalation rep to research to whomever he talked to and found out HP is disabling it out the door to their unaware consumers.
I also asked if HP tech team disabled it, would they be willing to send me a BIOS flash to re-enable it - ie. make that an option for those who are knowledgeable about RAID and can setup. The response was they probably won't. I pressed a little but didn't get anywhere - seems like a reasonable request to me/option to keep people happy.
Luckily I'm within my return window and will be taking this computer back. Sad considering how much time I've put into it thinking I had a computer capable to do what I need.
Anyway - please help spread the word so HP can get this into their knowledge DB and boards that RAID is GONE - removed purposefully by HP.

When dedicated RAID controllers are too expensive, the poor man should...

So the Disk Setup Guide on the PPBM7 Tweakers page states that for 5+ drives, RAID 3/5 (with dedicated controller) is the way to go... But that's a BIG price jump from a 4 drive system.
As of now my disks are:
C: Sandisk Extreme 120GB
D: WD RE4 1TB
E: WD RE4 1TB
F: WD Green 1TB
It's not fast enough, and I need more room on the media drive (it's 50% full, but will keep filling and degrading quickly). I also want a bigger F: as a dedicated backup.
I was thinking:
C: Same. OS, Programs, Page.
D + E: 2xRE$ in RAID 0 (onboard controller) Media, Projects
F: 160GB SSD for Cache/Preview
G: 2GB Backup of media/projects RAID 0
Now, I know the risks of RAID 0 for projects (and really for my setup losing media would be just as catastrophic), but 1) they're enterprise drives which should be a bit more reliable and 2) I run a backup everyday.
Am I making sane decisions?
P.S.
My entire cache/preview amounts to 15GB, so it seems a royal waste of space to run the 2 RE4's in RAID 0 for the cache. 120+GB SSD can be had for ~$65 ebay.

Eric - Thank you! I've never heard of putting the cache on the OS drive, but that would indeed save me some money and effort if it's not likely to degrade performance.
Bill and RJ - I apologize for wording it unclearly (plus a typo), but what I was trying to say was G: 2TB Backup of media/projects RAID 0 meaning G is a single 2TB drive acting as a dedicated backup of the media drive (which is a 2-disk RAID0). I am clear on the fact that RAID 0 has no redundancy, and doubles the risk of data loss.
RJ - I understand that even enterprise drives have a chance of failure, and perhaps in my circumstances the same chance as a regular drive, but I've been using these drives individually for a good while, have error and health checked them, so they're not duds. I would backup my media from the single drive where it now resides, setup the RAID 0, then restore the media to the new RAID 0 media drive so there'd be no chance (excluding lighting, bad luck or the wrath of the almighty) of losing everything mid-backup.
So, it appears the cheapest solution for me would be:
C: (120GB SSD) OS, Programs, Page. Cache, Previews
D+E: (2TB Spanned) Media, Projects
F: Single 2TB disk, backup of media/projects
Exports on D/E or F - it doesn't really matter to me. I don't mind waiting, and they generally go straight on the internet post-export.

Hardware config and componenets : raid, gpu and monitor choices

Right,
I've almost finalised my decisions about a new build I'm putting together to use cs4 design premium prgrammes (mainly photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, fireworks and flash) and in the near future 3d Max and possibly a video editing programme.
There are some things I'm stuck with for now; Motherboard and cpu, and some things I have a few questions about: raid 0, gpu and monitor choices. I appreciate this is a long post - but any feed-back would be appreciated.
MOTHERBOARD AND CPU
The motherboard and cpu were originally intended for a gaming pc:
MSI DKA790GX Platinum Motherboard
AMD phenom x4 9950 black edition
This motherboard and cpu are far better than any other I've had at my disposal when it has come to working with adobe programmes (CS2). So although
- I will only be able to go up to 8gb of ddr2 800mhtz ram (apparently the motherbioard becomes unstable with 8 gb 1066 ddr2)
- I do not have a motherboard that takes 2 6+ core cpus
From what I've seen of reviews on these components, at the moment, I'm quite happy with what I've got for both cs4 and 3d max use.
Besides, in the last few weeks I've learnt there are other things I can do to get maximum leverage out of a build comprising these components.
HDD CHOICE FOR RAID 0
I've read Harms generic guideline for disk setup here
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/662972?start=0&tstart=0
I gather that this guide is principally for optimum running when video editing. But I also gather that the performance enhancement of raid 0 compared to no raid will be beneficial for both photoshop and 3d Max. 4 discs with 2 in raid is what I was thinking of going for.
Discs I have or am thinking of buying:
1. I have 1 160gb WD ide 8mb cache hdd WD1600AAJB
2. I have 1 500gb WD Caviar blue SATA 16 mb cache hdd (WD500AAKS)
3. For the raid I'm thinking of buying 2x 1tb Samsung SpinPoint F3 7200rpm 32mb cache drives for £45.74 each
These are obviously highly rated as raid drives in these forums and I can't find anything smallar than a 1tb version of these drives at the shop I plan to order from – or is 1tb all they come in?
1st disc for OS and programmes
When going to the trouble of setting up raid is it acceptable to use an ide disc for the OS and programmes? I ask this because the 160gb WD hdd mentioned above has hardly been used....
If the ide drive is not approved of I'm thinking of buying either
1. A 500gb Seagate Barcude 7200.12 16mb cache sata 2 drive for £29.73 or
2. A 500gb Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000.C 7200rpm 16mb cache driver for £29.30 or
3. A 160gb samsung SpinPoint 7200rpm 8mb cache drive for 24.96
I know the Seagate and Hitachi are huge drives for the principal purpose of storing the OS and programmes but they both have 16mb cache and are only a few pounds more than the 160gb Samsung drive with only 8mb cache
Or
considering I'm going for F3 spinpoint for the raid discs would it be better, in terms of compatibility between the drives, to go for a spinpoint 8mb cache for the OS and programme discs
What should be my biggest concern here – compatibility between the discs or a higher cache on the disc - or considering they are all the same speed (7200rpm) does the cache not matter that much?
2nd disc for page file, media cache
I was thinking of dedicating the 500gb WD I have for these purposes. I've read in this forum that the WD drives are not that reliable when it comes to raid arrays – apart from that they seem to have a good reputation.
3-4th discs for raid 0
My mind is pretty much made up on the Samsung SpinPoint F3's
Partitions
Because there are a huge number of gb's in this set up I'm thinking of partioning the 1st and second discs so that in addition to using them for 'the operating system and programme files' and 'page file and media cache' their second partitions can be used to backup the data stored in the raid array.
Is it good practice to partition dedicated discs in this way?
THE GPU
Due to it's reletive cheapness, wide spread use and endorsement amongst gamers and workstation users alike, first of all I was swayed towards the 480GTX and using quadro driver hacks. But I couldn't get the number of ''risk factor' forum threads concerning making a GTX think its a quadro – particularly when it comes to using 3d max - out of my head. Even without the hacks there are a high percentage of grissly stories out there concerning the 480s and 3d max compared to workstation cards and 3d max. So I've decided that because I have the budget to get a workstation card (an ATI V7800) for 'just' £134 more than a GTX480 (£424 compared to £293) then for the peace of mind of more stable drivers, when getting to grips with a complex new programme, I might as well go for it and pay that bit extra.
I've had a good look at both the ATI V7800 and the PNY QUADRO 4000.... the differences between stream versus cuda and how these cards perform when rendering 3d programmes..... I started vearing towards the V7800 when I realised that when it came to rendering it was being compared very favourably with the quadro FX5800 let a lone the much cheaper quadro 4000.... Plus with the disc set up I am now thinking of I can buy the V7800 plus all the discs talked about above for £10 less than I can find the quadro 4000 for alone.
The only thing I'm concerned about is the V7800's compatibility with the cs4 design premium suite.
This page indicates that although some of these cards were released after cs4 they are supported by it.
http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/405/kb405445.html
Would it be wrong of me to suppose that, because the new V7800 is a work station graphics card, it will be supported by cs4?
What difference will it make if it isn't supported?
Having said that the quadro 4000 isn't listed as supported on this page either....
What would be your choice between the quadro 4000 and ATI V7800?
THE MONITOR
The monitor I'm looking at the 22” Dell 2209WA eIPS..... Although older (2008 vs 2009) the slightly larger 24”Dell 2408WFP has also caught my eye due to the higher contrast ratio (1300:1 vs 1000:1) and that this increased contrast ratio means it is capable of displaying 110 percent of the NTSC gamut as opposed to 86% with the the 2209WA.
I'm familiar with monitor on the 2006 dell XPS M1710 laptop and am very impressed with colour fidelity. The 2408WFP does require more calibration tweaking by the sound of it....
Anyone any experince of either of these monitors?
I'm off to the gym for an hour or so - I'll be back in a couple of hours

My strong advice: Don't skimp on price on hard drives.
Get high MTBF RAID edition drives (e.g., Western Digital RE-series drives).
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=30
In my main workstation I currently have two 1 TB WD RE3 drives that have been spinning in a RAID 0 configuration 24/7 with ZERO problems for a year now.
I figure one wants to minimize the chance of losing one's data down the road. How much would it cost you in time, effort, and lost work to recover your data from a backup if you should lose your hard drive?
Top-end drives can fail, sure, but the MTBF numbers say that the chances are much smaller than with "cheap" drives. And the RAID edition drives have additional features, such as vibration reduction, that differentiates them from lesser drives.
Ask yourself, why would one drive be cheaper than another? Poorer quality materials? Not as much quality control?
Another bit of info: Search this forum for "quadro". It seems that these expensive video cards may be seeing more trouble with Photoshop than you might expect. Some of the less expensive cards, that may have had more OpenGL testing (e.g., to support gaming) might be better choices for use with Photoshop. Personally I prefer ATI.
-Noel

3-Drive/4-Drive RAID setup questions

I'm contemplating purchasing a new 8-core Mac Pro. I understand RAID but I'm not an expert. That said, I'm thinking of doing one of the following but I don't know if both are doable:
One setup is 1 hard drive for Mac OS X, and 3 RAID drives for the video capture (3TB total RAID 0 Seagate 7200rpm drives).
Or, my question, can I just RAID 0 all 4 drives together and then create a partition for Mac OS X? It seems like this would give A LOT faster bootable drive, plus the benefits of seperating the media storage from the operating system.
The reason I ask now is this makes a difference in my purchase decision. If I can RAID all 4 drives together, do they all have to be the same capacity for RAID 0? If not, I'll just get a standalone 320GB drive for the OS, and RAID the other three 1TB drives together.
Last question, would it help to use a dedicated RAID card like the CalDigit card (or Apple card) instead of software RAIDing within Mac OS X?
Thanks in advance.

First off - DO NOT put your system on your capture RAID. No no no. bad bad bad.
Yes you can RAID your other three drives into a RAID 0 configuration using Disk Utility. All drives should be the same size. Recognize two things with this setup --
1. If your system crashes, you loose the RAID partition as it is created and maintained through system software.
2. If you loose one of the three drives, you loose all the information on all three drives.
A more secure way to go is with a hardware RAID controller. Apple sells one with the MacPros and Caldigit has one as well.
With the Caldigit you can set up the 3 drives as a RAID 5 which will give you data security. I'm not sure what RAID configurations beyond 0 the Apple card supports.
Good luck.
x

Raid decision

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for