Final Cut Server on a mini architecture
by Nathan McGinty
on
Sep 9, 2009 at 11:20:18 pm
Does this sound far-fetched? Can I introduce a Mini and Final Cut Server to get metadata and XML management without too much of a sickening bottleneck?
A small production for a documentary with incredibly diverse source formats and unlikely more than 2 editors working simultaneously onsite.
Used to be an edit bay, but now more of a capture system. FCS2 installed. May be used for Final Cut Pro or more likely DVD Studio Pro, audio and SD capture. The eSATA setup has been ok with HDV.
17" MacBook Pro 3.06GHz Intel - Will be used for dailies and as much field logging as can be done while conducting interviews. Likely to turn into the primary edit system. Running FCP6, and hesitant to install 7 until I figure how it'll work here with my locked-in PPC.
Animations and motion graphics will not be done on any of this equipment, but those are part of the post-production plans, and need to be given the equivalent of check-in check-out type access.
Workflow is likely to capture original video using HDV and convert to ProRes 422 as soon as possible. What else needs to be managed will be a lot of archival still photos, scans, textual components (transcriptions), and SD coming in via HD-SDI (which will presumably also be upconverted).
Final output would be at best to HDCAM, or Blu-Ray, but definitely DV and H.264.
I had been considering a workflow using one or all of XML, XSLT, MPEG-7 and Drupal, and SQL. Perhaps Final Cut Server could simplify things. I fully understand and appreciate the need to manage metadata.
I would try to use the RAID-0 eSATA array on the PowerMac as a NAS device, mounted over gig-E and mounted on the other systems. I am aware of what the bottlenecks might be.
If the MacBook Pro is attached to NAS on the PowerMac while editing FCP, via Final Cut Server on the mini, how much of a bottleneck does the mini become? It's just directing traffic to some degree, right?
I'm also thinking of adding a DROBO running RAID-5 for longer-term archival storage, and strictly using the RAID-0 NAS for scratch and work disk.
So the question is would it be possible to use a mac mini, say decked out with 4GB RAM and a 7200rpm drive in this environment to host Final Cut server without bringing everything to a screeching halt?
Another question, is it conceivably possible to create a cluster using QMaster that distributes Compressor loads across the mini and the PowerMac, and the MacBook Pro? I'm assuming they'd all need to have similar versions of Compressor.
I know it's a far-from-ordinary setup, but you work with what you got. My ulterior motive is to start playing with Final Cut Server.
Re: Final Cut Server on a mini architecture by Nicholas Stokes on Sep 10, 2009 at 2:21:12 am
There are a lot of if and maybe in your scenario.
I personally wouldn't put this into production, because the Mini will surely be the bottle neck at some point. No using the G5, with a multiport Gig-E card, and configuring it with Final Cut Server 1.1.1 may get you a lot more mileage. Buy as much RAM as you can afford.
You can still do you daily captures and such, but I'd stay away from using this system for editing 100% of the time. Part time DVD authoring should also be fine.
You can pass the Mini with RAM and use it as an edit system.
BTW none of the above is an Apple Pro Var supported configuration.
Re: Final Cut Server on a mini architecture by Matt Geier on Sep 10, 2009 at 2:51:57 am
Nathan,
I hope you're well. Thank you for posting this. - Usually I would just jump right into giving you some "Hardware Solution" and maybe recommend some pricing to consider. However, I'm going to be very frank with you.
I watch this forum and I participate here often. Some other people here will back this up I suppose. Please feel free to look at some previous posts for your answers which you intend to receive here.
The bottom line --- is that I see you really should be using different Server and Storage hardware if you want a setup that you can grow (without having to buy new hardware each time to grow the network for instance....)
You need to fork up a Mac Pro with Intel PCI Express Hardware. Running at least 10.5.8 or better.
We all understand your under a money crunch, but you have to have a working environment that will hold up your Video Editing properly.
Another thing you're going to find about this "video editing thing" you've inquired about, is that you will succeed in hooking all the cables together, but you're running a good risk for failure. (At some point it's going to fail....then what?) -- This is mostly because you're a video editor, so hopefully you can smirk at it! :)
What you're getting into needs to be handled by people that know about what your doing. THOSE OF US EXPERTS that do know you best in this particular situation definitely know what you like to do; --- YOU LIKE TO CREATE!
Truth be told you're creating a creature here that you cannot handle properly, perhaps even in the short term. If you're going to do this, you can certainly try it. (Go ahead it's a free country...) - Go plug your Ethernet cable into each Mac on their free port, if you don't have one, buy a card. - then you can go turn on Sharing (In your system preferences and go to sharing...) - After you've done that go turn on Jumbo Frames and start working over Ethernet. -- Open your FCP, point it to your storage, and fire away on whatever it is you want to do. Start editing different formats of video and then come back and TELL US ALL what the limitations are. -- Perhaps even how sad you are that it might have broken. ... or happy..
Here's my honest suggestion.... I cannot speak for the performance or the amount of "editing life" you can get out of this hardware you've listed above. As far as I'm concerned you just need to save yourself the money and buy direct attached storage. Keep "walking" those drives around. - After all, you're on a tight budget and you really don't want a long term solution which is a little more expensive. (Do you agree??)
I do know of some Ethernet based Shared Storage solutions that were designed for what you want to do. They are not what most consider inexpensive to you but they are very inexpensive solutions for what power they hold.
Whenever you need something to talk about with regard to your video editing hardware needs, you can call me.
Whenever you're ready to increase your budget, (perhaps 8K-10K) on a hardware solution set that was engineered to do what you want, you can sit and stew on how "helpful" I've been.
(Please don't misunderstand or take this post personally. Sometimes these forums can "appear" rough, but only good intent is meant) - It's for your own good.
Re: Final Cut Server on a mini architecture by Bob Zelin on Sep 10, 2009 at 3:42:23 am
hi -
the answer to your question is NO, it's not going to work.
We are the "bottom of the barrel" shared storage people, doing the cheapest solution for shared storage - I mention this because even with our WORKING SOLUTION that uses a $2700 MAC Pro as a server, the minute you turn on QMaster, it causes the system to crash. So even for more money than you want to spend, there are limitations. We try to do this stuff, so you don't have to buy XSAN, and Fibre, but we know that even we have limitations. But with a MAC Mini - sorry, it's not going to work. There is a big difference between someone showing you a demo of a 30 second playout, and then a REAL show that needs to play out for 30 - 60 minutes when you are outputting back to HDCam.
I can understand why you wouldn't recommend QMaster. I am assuming that the storage server in this scenario would already be I/O and CPU bound, and that trying to run a CPU and I/O intensive process like QMaster on top of that would be the proverbial straw that breaks the server's back.
I am still trying to understand the overhead requirements for Final Cut Server as a metadata tool.
A Mac Mini meets all of the requirements set out by Apple for installation. As far as I can tell, Final Cut Server is a purpose-built PostgresSQL database. The best information I've found on the topic is in the following thread, by Andrew Richards:
Final Cut Server does not serve the full-bandwidth media to Final Cut Pro, it merely organizes it. The heavy lifting of streaming media to FCP is strictly the storage platform's job.
Re: Final Cut Server on a mini architecture by Nathan McGinty on Sep 10, 2009 at 3:22:26 pm
I am not an editor. I am a producer, with an IT background (albeit not with a lot of experience deploying some of these tools). Trust me when I say that I understand I/O and network bottlenecks far better than I understand the nuances of editing. I will have an editor to handle the artistry.
I don't need a setup that can grow. I need a setup that can suffice for now on this one particular project, and perhaps not even for the duration. Clearly this is not an architecture that will scale.
Here is a suggestion that makes a lot of sense to me, and I am intrigued by the idea of running a 4-port Gig-E card in the G5 and bypassing the switch entirely.
Based on what information I can gather, a RAID-0 eSATA DAS on the G5 should give me 3-4 concurrent streams of ProRes SD over Gig-E. The G5 is a dedicated storage server and the MacBook Pro would be the edit suite.
I'm talking about an environment where likely only one editor (and maybe an assistant) will be working on this network at any given time. I'm talking about a project that may be in Post for 6-9 months. This is not an environment with multiple editors banging on the same project concurrently on a 1 week deadline for a client.
Still the question remains whether I can deploy Final Cut Server on a Mini for metadata management, and perhaps the only answer will be to try and see.
Re: Final Cut Server on a mini architecture by Matt Geier on Sep 18, 2009 at 5:13:24 am
Nathan,
I'm familiar with what you want to do, so please don't misunderstand me. I'm also familiar with Bob Zellin's article, as well as Fiber Channel configurations being talked about. I certainly don't doubt your confidence and experience. I'm simply being forthcoming, and trying to save some headache.
(If you want try and see if this will work (to test this configuration) - You'll need to put in a network adapter for you G5 PPC PCI X system. If you have two editors trying to share the server, they each need their own connection or you will never make this work properly. You don't want them sharing a connection, certainly. - and there is only one Ethernet port on those if i'm not mistaken.)
Obviously, you're trying to create a real time video editing environment which is "sustainable," let's say. You want to use Final Cut Server, I assume not only to manage your video assets but also all the editors to use it's (edit in place) feature. (Please say if otherwise..) and you want them to be doing it while simultaneously hitting a suggested server that is old technology, by standards now.
You're suggesting some kind of RAID 0 eSATA storage. That may provide enough bandwidth for two people to each have a Pro Res stream each going at once, but I don't believe you're storage will be fast enough to keep up without dropping frames.
Additionally, you want this to do Pro Res / Pro Res HQ. Setting this up, yes, you will likely have success pushing the bandwidth needed to make streams flow, however I don't think what you're suggesting will pass the data fast enough, before the next chunk of data is needed. (this means the risk of dropped frames..)
(How many streams of Pro Res HQ have you been able to read off the storage at one time?)
I don't think it will last very long. Just make sure you have a second plan in case that server crashes under the stress, or the storage goes berserk during shared activity.
I would not recommend a G5 PPC as a server in this video editing environment. I would however recommend a Mac Pro Quad Core at minimum to facilitate proper "hold up" under the pressure of Pro Res video editing.
As just a server for Final Cut Server, perhaps serving DV videos's etc... it's possible this will hold up to some degree. However, even this is going to be limited.
