The best RAID level for video editing that has some form of redundancy?

I've been asked to help find the best solution for importing and editing large amounts of HDV (25 Mbit/s) video. However, those whom I am helping also want a level of redundancy that will allow a single drive to fail and their data to be preserved. So what I'm trying to figure out is the best RAID level (or levels) for their need. I'm fairly certain that either 0+1 or 10 is what I'm looking for, however the I/O performance differences between 0+1 and 10 aren't quite clear to me. If someone could explain that to me I would appreciate it. Additionally, if someone knows a better level than either 0+1 or 10 for the needs I described, please don't hesitate to let me know.

The difference between RAID 10 and RAID 0+1 is how the array is created.
RAID 0+1 creates a RAID from multiple RAID 0 arrays that are mirrored.
You can tolerate any number of drive failures in any one side of the mirror (that side of the mirror goes offline as soon as any one disk fails, so it doesn't matter how many other disks fail in the same array), but one drive failure on both parts of the mirror will trash your data.
RAID 10 creates a stripe of multiple RAID 1 mirrors.
In this setup you create RAID 1 mirror sets and stripe them together.
In this setup you can tolerate one disk failure in each element of the stripe.
For example if you have 6 drives you might create three mirrors of two drives each, and each mirror is then striped.
You can lose one drive in each mirror, but if you lose two drives in any mirror set, you're out of luck.
In both cases, though, you're not going to get the best usage out of the array since mirroring has a 50% overhead - meaning you're only going to get 50% of your total disk capacity as usable space.
With the XServe RAID, the RAID 5 performance is very good - good enough for your 25MB/sec throughput so I'd go with RAID 5 arrays, not RAID 0 or 1 on the XServe RAID itself.
Then, depending on your space requirements, you can either stripe or mirror them together for a RAID 50 or 51 array. In this way you gain the data redundancy of RAID 5 with better disk utilization than 10 or 0+1.
RAID 50 will give you the best performance (and the most usable space), RAID 51 will give you the best redundancy.
At the end of the day it's up to you to decide which format to use based on performance and usable space requirements.

Similar Messages

  • What is the best Apple notebook for video editing and pro music creation?

    What is the best Apple notebook for video editing and pro music creation?
    I know I could opt for the most expensive and probably get what I want that way, but I´m not made of money, so what are your suggestions for minimum criteria and which would you recommend?

    MacBooks Pro are great Macs with a good hardware, so all of them will work for the use you want, but I think that you want the biggest display possible because of your uses. In this case, it has to be a 15-inch non-Retina MacBook Pro, with the settings you want. Note that, after buying the Mac, you can upgrade the HDD and memory without voiding the warranty, so you are free to install as much memory and the HDD size you want after buying it. It's my opinion, but you are free to do whatever you think it's better

  • What is the best macbook pro for video editing dslr footage?

    what is the best macbook pro for video editing dslr footage?

    It is the GPU that is important.  All the CPU's will be fast enough.  If you can affords it, the 15" with the NVIDIA GPU is the best.
    Ciao.

  • What is the best set up for video editing?

    What is the best computer? The best software? The best external storage? The best ram? 3D editing? Everything!!!!!!
    Running full HD and 720p at 60 fps videos. Clips ranging from a few seconds to 10-30 minutes.
    Cost isn't an issue.
    What is the best set up, not the most excessive. If it doesn't need to be there or it isn't greatly needed I would like to know. This is looking at the production aspects, not the camera and such. What is the best plug in for slow motion? Pros and Cons of the set up?
    I would greatly appriciate everyones input in this. Thank you so much.

    That is a hard question to answer.. Nothing is best for everyone... However if i am to generalize it I would put it this way.. If you want to cut everything from a short promos to hollywood pictures..
    A high end windows pc (only cause mac pro hasn't been updated in ages)
    Avid Media Composer with Nitrus DX
    Two monitors
    Broadcast monitor
    HD Deck
    pimping 5.1 speakers
    A good mixer
    You are looking at over 70,000 or 80,000, could even approach even more.. HD decks run atleast 15k.
    If price is not an issue then there you go....
    However this is not realistic for most people nor best solution by no means... I run a macbook pro with Avid (as primary) Final Cut 7, Final Cut X (for practice, didn't have to use it for a job yet), and Premiere (just in case)
    I am a final cut child who grew up on it and love it however everything I am doing in last few years is on AVID...
    Have a second monitor..
    I am very portable and rest of the gear I usually get where ever I work at.. I am looking into getting a good broadcast monitor connected with AJA thunderbolt..
    Like I said this is very open question, there is no (BEST) it all depends what you will be doing.. If you get AVID (which can do everything, however is cluncky as **** and counter intuitive) but you are only cutting wedding videos and short format stuff, it would be an overkill galore.. Just get FCP X in that case... Simple,easy, one app...
    Be more specific and you will get clearer answers..

  • Best Apple Computer for Video Editing (when you're on a budget)?

    I shoot video on a Canon XL2 and edit with Final Cut Express. I am looking to get a more powerful computer to edit as I currently edit on a 2007/8 MacBook with 120GB hard drive. It gets the job done but rendering takes forever and I can tell my MacBook is slowing down. What is the best apple computer for video editing? And, what would you recommend if you're on a budget? iMac? MacBook Pro? Thanks for any and all help.

    Well, depending on budget...
    Today, this would be my personal choice...
    http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC560LL/A?mco=MTg2OTUwMjQ
    (3.33 GHz “Westmere” 12 GB Memory)
    http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC511LL/A?mco=MTg1ODA4MDM
    (2.93 GHz “Quad-Core i7” 8 GB Memory)
    If portability is an issue...
    http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC024LL/A?mco=MTc0Njg1NzI
    (2.8 GHz “Intel-Core i7 ” 8 GB Memory)
    Regards
    Nolan

  • What is the best RAID configuration for a MacPro as a Logic User?

    There ought to be a universal answer to this question: what is the best RAID configuration for Logic Mac Pro users? I will be more specific.
    I use Logic Studio, Reason, Ableton, and Motu Symphonic Instrument simultaneously.
    I want to fail safe my precious audio files and improve performance as the system reads/writes data from multiple files, from audio tracks to digital samples.
    I want to run video files simultaneously to do nifty audio soundtracking to video.
    Here is the configuration I have in mind.
    HD 1: OS and Logic Studio, Reason/Ableton samples etc. software (non-raid) (250 GB)
    HD 2/3: MIrrored RAID set for AUDIO FILES (500 Gb identical pair)
    HD 4: Video files / Bouncing (1 TB)
    Makes sense right? A disk for reading software. A pair of 500 GB disks for reading/writing audio files and sessions in mirrored array. A 1 TB disk for video and bouncing. The main question I have is, for audio files only, is striped or mirrored better? 64K blocks the best? And are there any more details. I assume to do this in Disk Utility.

    Well, both Mirrored and Striped have their pros and cons. If you use mirrored, it will offer no better performance than the spec'ed drive along with it's sata bus speed. The plus point is, if one drive goes down, you have the second as a backup as the complete contents of one drive are mirrored on the other.
    With striped you will get a performance boost because all files (for example a single project) will get written across both drives and hence split the load on the drives and the SATA busses. The drawback is that you'll have to make sure you have a good, regular backup schedule in place because when one of the drives goes to drive heaven, you're going to be stuffed without a full backup of both drives.
    Exactly what performance boost you'd get will depend on your project, number of files, size of files, fragmentation of files, track count etc. You may find it would be easier to use the 3 drives straight, with no raid and have:
    HD 1: OS and Apps. No samples at all.
    HD2: Audio Files for Logic projects
    HD3: Reason, Ableton, Logic etc instrument sample library
    HD4: Video and bouncing.
    Which is what I ended up doing although I use HD4 as an interchangeable backup for HD1 and 2.
    There is no universal answer to this as each must make their own choice based on their preferences and needs. Mirrored will give you full backup but on-site, in machine backup. Not much good if something untoward and drastic happens to the physical machine. I think a few people toy with striped RAID but fall on the side of using the drives straight, as in their projects they don't see a big enough gain over splitting the data across your 3 remaining drives without RAID. Studios that seriously consider raid often go out and get a dedicated raid that can offer more variations than raid 0 or raid 1 (Striped and Mirrored) and better throughput.
    I hope this helps a little and not just added to the dilemma.

  • What is the best export setting for video on blogger

    What is the best export setting for video from premeire to blogger.com or blogspot.com

    I have not been able to find the technical limits/specs for the site Blogger or blogspot.com. That is why I made the post here thinking some Adobe users may have experimented already and come up with good export settings for AVI DV video to a format optimized for Blogger.

  • Best display profile for video editing

    Among the choices you see under Display Profile on a Mac, what is considered "best" choice for video editing, so that you can assess color, exposure, etc. in your footage as you edit? I have always used Adobe RGB (1998), but realize that I have no knowledge about whether that's a good choice.
    What do the 'good' editors use (to differentiate them from guys like me)? Do top editors calibrate their monitors for video editing? Any insights into this would be greatly appreciated!
    -- Mark Strand

    what is considered "best" choice for video editing
    there is only one setting for Final Cut; Generic RGB
    This is an apple stipulation, its how Final Cut must be set up, choosing any other profile will cause problems with any out put files you create.
    Do top editors calibrate their monitors for video
    ICC colour management is designed and can only be used for still image files eg. so while you can calibrate a computer monitor it can only be used with still image files; TIFF CRW JPEG PSD. ICC profiles are not recognised by Final Cut Pro or QuickTime.
    The colour management system used in video involves using video scopes, an accurate PAL or NTSC colour monitor and tools like the 3 way colour corrector.

  • Best affordable choice for video editing & other stuff?

    I've been a PC user forever. I'm looking to enter the world of Mac. I do video editing with Adobe CC on a windows 7 Destop PC with an i7 Quadcore and have a nice LED monitor. I'd like a Mac capable of doing graphics well and has the processing power of an i7. I was thinking of a Macbook rather than than a iMac because I don't need the built in screen - I already have a very nice LED monitor. I also like the idea of portability. So I figure i could hook up the Macbook to my LED monitor when at my desk, and then be able to port it around when I wanted to go mobile. Is this reasonable? Is a macbook laptop capable of this kind of processing? I know my HP Powerbook with Win7 struggles doing this kind of stuff even though it has a dedicated nVidea Graphics and is an i7 2.3GHz with 16G memory, so I never use my HP laptop for video editing. I thought about the Mac Pro, but that is WAY out of my budget. Is there a Macbook that would be good for video editing and not break the bank? Like I've said, I'v discounted the idea of getting an iMac because of space & (I already have a decent size LED monitor that I'd like to continue to use and share with my Windows PC.

    the last 2 and the bottom of this link would be more than adequate: http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro

  • What is the best audio level for making a CD from video?

    I know that -12dB is the optimum level for making a DVD. When I took this same level (peaking at -12dB), exported it to AIFF and then put it into iTunes and burned a CD, the volume was definitely lower than other CDs.
    Does anyone know the standard level for CDs?
    I'm doing this to convert a video of a concert into a CD.

    The standard for CDs is basically -0.1. Generally, at least with pop & rock, the mastering stage puts the levels as loud as they possibly can be without distorting.
    Plus, with content like music that is a little more consistent (level-wise) than dialog, SFX, etc., it's easier to ride it up closer to zero.

  • What is the best macbbok pro for video and photo editing

    I am looking at getting a Macbook Pro but not sure about how to configure it. What are the advantages of the 13 vs 15 and the dual core i7 vs quad core i7?

    It is the GPU that is important.  All the CPU's will be fast enough.  If you can affords it, the 15" with the NVIDIA GPU is the best.
    Ciao.

  • Creating the best RAID setup for my MacPro using FCP

    I have a MacPro, 2 x 3GHz Dual Core, 16GB ram, 4 x 500GB drives and I work in FCP 5.1.4 and with my Hardware setup I feel it should be faster and I've been wanting to set up a RAID but not sure how to do it, or the best way way to do it.
    Out of the 4 drives I have, Drive one is my main drive (boot drive, apps etc.) Drives (2 & 3) which is a TB combined, I'd like to turn those into a RAID) to speed up rendering, editing etc. In FCP and Motion. Drive 4 is where I keep all my working files.
    My files are backed up regularly onto external harddrives and kept offsite.
    Can I leave everything I have on my entire system the way it is and just turn Drives 2 & 3 into a RAID that's best for this application? People who work in VIDEO I know do this all the time to speed things up but I can't find the steps for the best way to do this. Bits and pieces all over the place but I can't put this puzzle together.
    Can you point me in the direction in how to do this?
    As I'm doing this is there anything I should be careful about?
    Please help me understand this process.
    Just in case you need to know what kind of drives I have here's the info:
    Capacity: 465.76 GB
    Model: ST3500641AS P
    Revision: 3.BTA
    Native Command Queuing: Yes
    Queue Depth: 32
    Removable Media: No
    Detachable Drive: No
    BSD Name: disk1
    Bay Name: "Bay 1"
    OS9 Drivers: No
    S.M.A.R.T. status: Verified
    Volumes:
    Startup Drive:
    Capacity: 465.44 GB
    Available: 367.86 GB
    Writable: Yes
    File System: Journaled HFS+
    BSD Name: disk1s2
    Mount Point: /

    My advice would be 'yes' to what you are saying... with the exception of the Softraid stuff - not that I think its wrong, but I've never used it, so I can't comment if you need it or whether the Mac OSX raid is sufficient - but others here say they prefer it so fair enough. You can see some comparisons here http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/softraid/351/
    amug always have indepth benchmarks of stuff.
    I wouldnt call myself an FCP guru, but I think that your suggestion of putting the FCP scratch disk and client, video files on the raid are the best idea. The scratch folder is essentially where the temp-rendered clips go, so its audio and video - you want that folder to be on a really fast volume. You also want your source video files to be on a really fast volume, so they can be streamed fast enough to play in realtime too when playing unrendered areas, or building a preview.
    Some might say in FCP you get bast performance when your scratch disks and video files are on seperate disks. Thats totally true, so it can read from one disk and write to the other at the same time. But in your case you have a 3disk stripe, which is roughly 3x faster than either of your disks! So it would still be faster to have them all on the same stripe.
    You can leave your FCP app on the sys drive, keeps things cleaner (drive1 for sys and appsm raid for data). You can keep your project files where ever you want, they're not very big and are kept in memory so dont affect performance at all. Though to stay clean I would keep it on the raid, so again the raid is for data, and you can back it up accordingly. The system drive is only for apps and system so you can back that up accordingly too (less frequently probably).
    P.S. Technically your 'point 8' is inaccurate. After creating the raid you will not see drives 2,3 or 4. You will see only one 'volume' for all 3 drives. Overall your mac will have 2 'volumes': the system drive, and the stripe of 2,3,4. Physical drives and 'volumes' that mount in your OS are completely seperate. You can create multiple partitions in a single drive, or you can combine multiple drives into a single volume (e.g. using raid). But basically yes, you copy your client files back to the raid.
    And remember, if any ONE of the disks in the stripe dies, you lose ALL of the data on the entire 1.5TB volume. So it is pretty important to backup regularly!!!!
    (I dont wanna confuse you any more, but raid5 is a good option if you want more security and don't mind paying extra :P, you'll need more hardware for that, and more drives to make it worthwhile - but I would say skip that for now, as you can build your raid0 for free or almost free and use that until you think you need more)

  • What are the best export settings for video with small text?

    I am making videos of lectures (where slides show up next to a small video of a person talking). I would like the text to show up as legibly as possible, all while maintaining a small file size (smallest possible) and still maintaining quality. What would you recommend? The slides change every couple minutes or so, but I don't wnat to reduce the frame rate becuase I do have that small video in the corner. Which settings and format are best? Also, I'll be uploading this to Youtube.
    THANKS!

    Keep in mind that the small video in the corner does not require as high a data rate as a full screen video. So, if a full screen video requires, let's say 5Mb/s for a talking head, you might be able to get away with 2Mb/s or less for the entire frame with a little video and a lot of static slide. Also remember that the less motion in the video, the lower the bit rate can be.
    Try it out.
    Use the H.264 preset for YouTube at the same frame size as what you are editing, and then reduce the data rate to half normal. Export and check out the quality. Then halve it again and check the quality. Keep going until the quality is unacceptable then go up a little. Find your sweet spot.
    It is subjective. You have to decide the lowest bit rate you personally can accept and still be confident that the client will be OK with it.

  • Best Mac configuration for video editing

    I am going to be getting into video editing at work and have about a $6000 budget for the software (Final Cut Studio) and the hardware to do the work on.  I'll be doing short 3-5 minute videos as well as some lengthier 20-30 minute videos. Those of you who have a lot of experience working with FCS, what would be your recommendations for my Mac configuration? Memory, Drive, Storage, etc.  Thanks!

    Buy the best MacPro you can afford.  Go for the best ATi video card that is an option, try to get at least a gig of RAM per CPU core, and don't skimp on your storage.
    At that budget I'd say 8 core 2.4, 12gb RAM, 1tb boot drive, 2x 2tb editing drives, the ATi 5870, and a single 27 inch window.  That comes in at about 5700 without FCS.  The cuts I'd make if that's too much are 8gb RAM and 1 2tb drive for editing to get down to 5100, 6100 with FCS.  If you can wait Final Cut X comes out this summer for about $300.  We don't know a whole lot about it yet, but the better specs with FCX will be a lot faster than the lower specs with FCS.  Whether or not you can wait is a question you need to answer for yourself.
    If you don't need the monitor change your boot drive to the SSD.

  • What is the best lossless compression for video?

    I have a large amount of captured video, which is saved in uncompressed format.
    I want to archive this video and I need to figure out what the best compression choice is.
    It's video only and I want the archived materials to be compressed as losslessly as possible and as small as possible. Losslessness is more important than size. The original material was captured in FCP from a video camera using Firewire. It is NTCS DV.
    Multiple angles of this source material were edited in FCP and rendered to make the final, uncompressed files. Those are what I need to compress and archive.
    Any suggestions would be appreciated.

    There is no such thing as lossless compression.
    This is not really true. There are many ways to compress - just google "compression algorithms" and you'll find some. Two basic schemes are either lossless or lossy. Lossless seeks to remove redundant or repetitive information, this is like Run Length Encoding or LZW encoding. Lossy throws away information that is generally "not perceived". JPEG, MPEG, H.264, DV are examples of lossy compression.
    YUV "lossless" is 4:2:2 and is considered uncompressed, yet it takes up less space than RGB 4:4:4 encoding. Simply zipping the file compresses it (uncompressed codecs squeeze better, but DV does compress, indicating redundant information) - a TIFF sequence might have run length encoding or LZW. Both are lossless.
    To get back to the question, Patrick:Losslessness is more important than size.
    H.264 is a fantastic compression - it is, however, FAR from lossless AND it is not directly editable. You'd need to convert it back to an editable format, ensuring even more loss. Not within the parameters of your desired solution...
    Patrick

Maybe you are looking for