Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ADVERTISING :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US :: FAQ
Creative COW's LinkedIn GroupCreative COW's Facebook PageCreative COW on TwitterCreative COW's Google+ PageCreative COW on YouTube
FORUMS:listlist (w/ descriptions)archivetagssearchhall of famerecent posts

MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX

COW Forums : metaSAN

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook
Shawn LarkinMetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Apr 25, 2012 at 1:26:34 pm

The new ProjectStore feature looks like it can enable shared storage for FCPX without using XSAN because it uses the same paradigm FCPX uses with XSAN (locking a shared location of a project file for the editor and allowing others read only access). We want to use FCPX and stay GbE. Right now we're sharing using AFP from a MacPro NAS Head. Ideally, we would load MetaLAN Server on this NAS Head and MetaLAN Client on our Editing Machines if it will enable shared storage for FCPX.

Can someone confirm a few things about MetaLAN and ProjectStore?

1) When using MetaLAN do the shared volumes look like direct attached storage for clients (the way a real SAN works)?

2) How do you create and manage ProjectStore files in 5.0? Can this be applied to FCPX (not just AVID)?

3) Have you tested MetaLAN (or MetaSAN) with FCPX 10.0.3 or later?

Thanks in advance.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Bernard LamborelleRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 11, 2012 at 1:45:50 pm

Hi Shawn,

Sorry for the delayed response to your post.

1) Yes, metaLAN mounts like a local drive. It provides a fast, block-level connection to the storage. Think of a "shareable iSCSI", and you'll be close.

2) ProjectStore is a feature that you can enable/disable on each of your SAN volumes. When enabled, users can create, manage and protect "projects" in addition to working with their regular folders. When a "project" is created, a special folder is created in a hidden location on the SAN volume. When "mounting" a project, this special folder mounts like a virtual volume on the user's desktop. Only one user can mount a project with r/w attributes, meanwhile, other users can only access this project as r/o. This is functionality is generic. It works with Avid because it is a "private" volume. However, it works equally well with any application. You should think of it as a protected workspace that can be shared. It is protected while you work with it, meaning other users cannot temper with your content. Those familiar with volume-level workflow will understand because it works much of the same. The difference is that with a volume-level SAN, you need to preconfigure and manage physical volumes. With ProjectStore, you work with folders that mount like volume. The difference is important because the free space available on the SAN volume is available to ALL projects. If you run out of space on one project, any free space you make on the SAN volume is immediately available. To summarize, ProjectStore gives you the very best of both worlds: the workspace protection of volume-level SAN with the ease of management and flexibility of file-level SAN. The fact you can continue to use the main SAN volume as the global repository for all stuff everyone needs r/w means you always have both options available to you.

3) This is where we needed to do some more testing and the reason for the delayed response. As it turns out, FCPX works fine with ProjectStore, but does not allow linking to projects that are in r/o mode. We're not FCPX experts, and perhaps there is something we are missing, but so far, this is the behaviour we have been able to observe. Any input or workaround suggestion welcome...

Bernard Lamborelle
bernard at tiger-technology.com
http://www.tiger-technology.com
514-667-2015


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 15, 2012 at 1:45:36 am

Hi Bernard,

If you try to add media from a ProjectStore r/o location, what are the FCPX event preferences set to on the machine trying to add it?

I ask because XSAN is setup for FCPX almost exactly the same way you have setup ProjectStore. As long as the user is NOT copying the media over to their event library (i.e. the preference box is not checked to copy media in FCPX), then it seems like it should work and only add alias links to the FCPX event that are r/o. XSAN locks other FCPX users -- all users actually -- out from actually writing to the media that a client has checked out in FCPX. The only difference is that you can make any folder a "SAN Location" with a FCPX client running on XSAN -- it doesn't have to be a hidden place at the root of the volume accessed by a private IP address like ProjectStore. Instead, you just point to a directory and "Add SAN Location" in the FCPX drop down menu. But functionally, ProjectStore and FCPX "SAN Locations" are the same thing.

A possible explanation for ProjectStore not working with FCPX aliases even with the preferences set correctly is that FCPX may need write privileges to all media -- including alias linked files -- when in an event. Perhaps, XSAN can manage this in the background for FCPX clients but ProjectStore doesn't have this capability.

Please let me know if you find out more. We really want to be able to use ProjectStore for FCPX event media on MetaLAN. And thanks for the reply.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Bernard LamborelleRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 15, 2012 at 10:16:08 pm

Hi Shawn,

Good question. Let me find out and report back...

Bernard


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 12:35:51 am

Hey guys.

Just subscribing to this thread as I am also curious as to how metasan will integrate with FCPX.

San locations do work, but permissions don't seem to be honored and our NTFS storage doesn't seem to like the aliased media that can be created in FCPX.

Then aliased media is offline until I copy the media in to the Event.

Thanks for any insight or updates.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 2:49:21 am

Hi Jeremy,

Can you further clarify a few things:

1) What version of MetaSAN are you running and are FCPX clients connected through a fiber (and a GbE) switch or are you on MetaLAN?

2) SAN Locations do work without XSAN?

3) "Then aliased media is offline until I copy the media in to the Event" means that you import media from one event folder to another event folder without copying it. Then FCPX creates the alias but it will not link back to the original file in the original event folder so you have to actually go get the original file and re-import a real copy of it?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 3:42:17 am

Sure. Sorry for any confusion.

1) Mixed fibre and ethernet. MetaSAN and metaLAN. It's version 4.9.whatever the latest version is.

2) Yes. San Locations work on both fibre and Ethernet, but you can mount any of them on any machine at the same time, meaning they aren't "protected". Wondering if ProjectStore will help here.

3) If I import files to fcpx (not from another Event) without "copy to event" checked, the media "container" shows up in fcpx offline. I then have to copy drag the files in to fcpx to imprt hard media in to the event. The offline files are then online. Basically, I can't seem to have any aliased media in X. I'm wondering if it's because our storage is formatted NTFS. It's a bummer as I can't reference media which means we have to have multiple copies of media.

I would love to find out if other users have things working differently.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 1:40:02 pm

Thanks Jeremy for the reply. This is VERY helpful to know.

So perhaps Bernard can test a few things for us:

1) If Volumes are HFS+, will aliased media work in FCPX events?

2) Can you confirm ProjectStore behaviour with FCPX per my last question and followup on this thread?

Thanks in advance.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 1:47:00 pm

Shawn-

Do you have a San now or are you looking at getting one?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 2:13:43 pm

We server out clients with a NAS Head (MacPro) connected to fast storage (ATTO RAID card + drives) over GbE right now. This is the cheap man's SAN.

Some time ago, we tested MetaLAN on it, but decided to just go AFP.

But now that we are playing around with FCPX (to jump from FCP7), we either:

1) Change network infrastructure to a proper SAN to use shared storage with FCPX
2) Use MetaLAN and ProjectStore with FCPX
3) Do both (with MetaSAN)

The alternative to this is using Sparse Disk Images for Events and Projects in FCPX on our NAS, but you can't index your media or get to it for repurposing without searching for and mounting a Disk Image. So we can't go that direction either.

That's why I'm asking Bernard these questions.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 2:34:11 pm

Awesome. I was hoping if you could test it. Sorry to pry, but thanks for the response.

I don't know of anyone else testing SAN configs with FCPX, so I am curious as to what others are doing.

Sparse disk images.

I know they are all the rage, but the performance of them is no good, and while very clever, they are an exploitation of the file system.

I don't recommend them.

Plus, if you do decide to go SAN, then you'll get SAN Locations which is one of FCPX's biggest secrets, and you won't need sparse images anymore.

Do you have a GigE PCIe card in your MacPro? How many clients?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 3:07:16 pm

We are configured this way:

- MacPro with RAID Card connected to a lot of drives

- MacPro also has a Small Tree 6port GbE NIC which 6 iMac Editing Clients plug directly into

We used to have the 6port GbE NIC aggregated to a GbE switch and the 6 editors were connected to the switch instead of directly to the server. But we have more stability and speed directly connecting to the MacPro. Depending on our next build out, we might get a new switch that has 10GbE slots so we can put a new 10GbE NIC in the MacPro.

Or we might go the OWC route once that rolls out. They are releasing a low cost SAS Switch which will work with MetaSAN.

There are a lot of shared storage flavours and options right now.

FINALLY, I really want to find out if ProjectStore will work as a kind of SAN Location substitute with FCPX. So that no matter which way we build out our network next, it can play with FCPX. I don't really want to deploy XSAN because it takes a lot more to setup and we don't have an IT staff to maintain it here. So it's either AFP or MetaSAN/LAN with FCPX.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 3:35:49 pm

[Shawn Larkin] "We used to have the 6port GbE NIC aggregated to a GbE switch and the 6 editors were connected to the switch instead of directly to the server. But we have more stability and speed directly connecting to the MacPro. Depending on our next build out, we might get a new switch that has 10GbE slots so we can put a new 10GbE NIC in the MacPro."

Perfect. Our system is similar but different. Thanks for writing about it. It seems metaSAN would be a good fit provided it works with your workflow.

I hear you abut XSan. We have been very happy with metaSAN. I am not an IT master, I am just an editor. metaSAN has been a great fit so far. I hope we can get it running optimally with FCPX if that's the next NLE that we decide to go with.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 3:59:21 pm

No problem. We're both looking for the same solution.

Will you guys be jumping on MetaSAN 5+ anytime soon?

I am also very curious if ProjectStore will work with FCPX well or if you can get it to and need someone to test.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 4:34:01 pm

[Shawn Larkin] "Will you guys be jumping on MetaSAN 5+ anytime soon?"

We have a VFibre from Sonnet, so it's an all in one solution, but really when you break it down it's parts, it's almost the same setup that you have with Fibre thrown in there. The metadata master is Windows, though, hence the NTFS storage.

I have asked if v5 is good to go, and Sonnet was still testing it.

Once it's gets a blessing from Sonnet, I'm sure we will move forward on it as it supposedly brings some better Windows performance, although performance has been outstanding already with v4.9.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 4:37:40 pm

Sounds good.

Is there any way I can contact you down the road to find out how 5 and X play together?

We will look to actually pull the trigger on this stuff at the end of summer. So I'm thinking you will have some experience testing in a couple months...


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 4:59:31 pm

Absolutely.

editstation at gmail dot com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Bernard LamborelleRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 3:11:37 pm

Shawn,

It looks like "Add SAN Location" in the FCPX drop down menu won't let you select a r/o location. Do you know of any workaround?

Bernard


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on May 30, 2012 at 3:32:07 pm

"Do you know of any workaround?"

That's my question to you, actually...

Have you tested ProjectStore more with FCPX? Is there a way to use this as a substitute for "Add SAN Location" ?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 6, 2012 at 6:34:51 pm

[Shawn Larkin] "That's my question to you, actually...

Have you tested ProjectStore more with FCPX? Is there a way to use this as a substitute for "Add SAN Location" ?"


This is pretty awesome.

I had the opportunity to install v5.

I also enabled ProjectStore.

ProjectStore seems to work great in my very limited testing.

This might be hard to explain over text, but I'll do my best.



Once I enable the "Edit" in ProjectStore, you still have to mount the ProjectStored Volume as a "San Location" in FCPX, it doesn't show up as a normal connected "Volume" like an external drive. As long as you have a SAN, this is OK. I can then mount it on one machine, but once I mount the ProjectStore on another machine as read only, I cannot add that San Location in FCPX as it says there's "no access". Perfect!

If I leave a Location as r/w access and quit FCPX. Then, I go to ProjectStore and release it, enable "edit" access on another machine, if that machine had the SAN Location mounted previously, it simply mounts as r/w.

This means that it is really hard to screw up, and ProjectStore seems to protect the Events/Projects very well.

More testing to follow, but at first glance, this seems really awesome and useful, and also easy to use.

What is still a problem is that the referenced Event media still show up as offline. Do we know if this is an NTFS limitation or is it a global metaSAN limitation? Everything is fine if I copy the media in to the Event.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 6, 2012 at 8:47:48 pm

Thanks Jeremy. This is helpful. So basically, what I am getting is:

Project Store = SAN Location

You must:

1) Check out the project directory from ProjectStore

2) Add SAN Location to this checked out directory

And then you are free to edit r/w on that directory the way FCPX wants you to.

However, if another editor tries to create alias media links in a different event (which are linked to the actual media in your checked out project), then those alias's reference offline media because FCPX needs r/w permission.

Is that correct?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 6, 2012 at 9:14:52 pm

[Shawn Larkin] "1) Check out the project directory from ProjectStore"

Yes, and this mounts a virtual disk on your desktop.

Here's the interface:



projectstore.png

[Shawn Larkin] "2) Add SAN Location to this checked out directory

And then you are free to edit r/w on that directory the way FCPX wants you to."


Yes.

[Shawn Larkin] "However, if another editor tries to create alias media links in a different event (which are linked to the actual media in your checked out project), then those alias's reference offline media because FCPX needs r/w permission.

Is that correct?"


You lost me on the alias media links part. If I try and load the San Location in FCPX to use on another machine (and the ProjectStore is mounted as Read only), FCPX says I can't load it, which prevents users form loading the same Project/Event on another machine, which wasn't possible before with just metaSAN.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 6, 2012 at 10:42:17 pm

To clarify:

If another editor wants to use media that is actually inside a checked out event what happens?

For instance, say I go into ProjectStore and check out a directory read-only since you currently have it checked out in ProjectStore and mounted as a SAN Location -- what will happen?

Furthermore, what specifically happens if I don't have "copy files to Final Cut Events folder" checked?

Will it create the alias files and work in this case?

Thanks a lot for help.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 6, 2012 at 11:41:07 pm

[Shawn Larkin] "For instance, say I go into ProjectStore and check out a directory read-only since you currently have it checked out in ProjectStore and mounted as a SAN Location -- what will happen?"

You can't. Fcpx says you don't have the privileges. You can "reach in" to the read only disk on your desktop and grab what you need, and copy it to a valid r/w Store.

[Shawn Larkin] "Furthermore, what specifically happens if I don't have "copy files to Final Cut Events folder" checked?

Will it create the alias files and work in this case?"


No, this still isn't working, and I don't know if it's NTFS or metaSAN, or both that is at fault.

I can hopefully get a test of this done on an HFS+ metaSAN install by the end of the week as ideally, this would be the most efficient way to work if editors are sharing the same media. There'd be one "media pool" or folders were you kept your media, and then each editor would have their own Project/Event Store and reference that media. You could easily swap the "CurrentVersion" Project/Event file, or swap Stores, or any combination that would allow the editors to get the appropriate database to each others machine and not double up on media in the Event.

If editors aren't working on the same media and therefore have separate media needs, then you simply mount the appropriate Store as r/w and add the SAN Location on any available machine.

It's kind of hard to explain, but I'd be happy to screen share with you if you'd like so you can see it in action.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 7, 2012 at 1:45:33 pm

Thanks Jeremy. Much appreciated so far. I'd love to hear back when you try out an HFS+ Volume too. At that point a screen share would be great too. I'll shoot you an email shortly.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 8, 2012 at 3:14:41 pm

I found one tester and they confirmed that alias files do in fact work with metaSAN and HFS+ storage, which is good news for HFS+ drives.

Unfortunately, it seems that metaSAN has a problem with Mac alias files and NTFS storage.

Hopefully, this can get sorted!

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Bernard LamborelleRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 8, 2012 at 3:41:08 pm

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for reporting. This alias issue on NTFS has now been flagged as a defect. It is too early to predict the outcome, but our guys feel there is a good chance it can be fixed.

Cheers,

Bernard


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jun 8, 2012 at 3:43:50 pm

Thank you, Bernard.

Please keep us updated!

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Matt TrubacRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jul 9, 2012 at 12:37:19 pm

I know it has only been a month, but was wondering if there have been any updates or discoveries on the issue of using linked fcpx alias event media with MetaLAN / MetaSAN?

Thanks.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jul 9, 2012 at 1:54:11 pm

Hey, Matt.

I haven't heard of anything yet, but it's being worked on.

This is only a problem on NTFS storage, and works fine on hfs+.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Matt TrubacRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jul 9, 2012 at 9:54:46 pm

Thanks Jeremy. I have no experience with SAN's but think I need one. I'm hoping to setup something small to start that will increase efficiency between 3 workstations. We edit a mix between FCP7 and FCPX... more and more with X. With FCP7 we got by doing things over gigabit with AFP. We typically push files around to bare sata drives in esata/fw800 docks and it is getting crazy trying to keep track of everything. I would like a central pool for media, projects and events.

I was thinking of going with SNS iSanMP along with GlobalSan xTarget and trying to use a MacPro as a workstation and a server. I don't know for sure, but feel the volume level san of (i)SanMP will be limiting and have started looking into MetaLAN.

I'd like to run the server from a Windows desktop because I think I can build a more flexible system for less than buying a mac to dedicate to the task. To get started I think I might try to run a few internal sata drives in raid 5, and then look into an external raid down the road as our studio continues to grow.

I was ready to pull the trigger until I read this morning about the FCPX alias problem with NTFS drives. I hope this gets sorted soon. Needing to duplicate media into each event will eat up a small raid fast.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jul 10, 2012 at 5:50:44 pm

[Matt Trubac] "Thanks Jeremy. I have no experience with SAN's but think I need one. I'm hoping to setup something small to start that will increase efficiency between 3 workstations. We edit a mix between FCP7 and FCPX... more and more with X. With FCP7 we got by doing things over gigabit with AFP. We typically push files around to bare sata drives in esata/fw800 docks and it is getting crazy trying to keep track of everything. I would like a central pool for media, projects and events."

A SAN will certainly help. We were at a point where we needed to buy more storage for our main edit suites as they were always full or near full. We were constantly juggling projects on and off and between the two main rooms, and it was a major hassle. I started looking at two new fully stocked RAIDs, then started looking at SANs. We then figured that we can add the other satellite stations as well, so the SAN started to make a lot of sense.

Local storage is cheaper and easier, certainly, but the SAN has made us more productive.

Our SAN is an "all-in-one" turnkey system from Sonnet. The metadata controller is a windows box. It's been very good. There's this NTFS/FCPX hiccup and I hope Tiger (metaSAN) can fix. Even with a big raid, the space fills up. I hope it can get sorted too.

If you have any questions, I'll try and answer them.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn LarkinRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jul 12, 2012 at 7:59:17 pm

Hey Guys,

Personally, I prefere HFS+ to NTFS because of the simplified maintenance of it -- as in run Disk Warrior once a month on the volumes.

I don't see many "all in ones" that support MetaSAN/LAN. But you might consider Small Tree's Titanium box if you go that route.

I've gotten incredible service from those guys in the past.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Jul 12, 2012 at 8:08:39 pm

I don't run Disk Warrior unless it's absolutely needed. In fact, it has always done more bad than good unless my drive was seriously in trouble.

Windows has built in defrag and also has a built in disk catalog checker.

If something was turned off i the wrong sequence, then I run maintenance mode on metaSAN and run the file system checker. I can also defrag from Windows when needed.

Also, putting together a Windows metadata controller is much cheaper than using a MacPro, but the nice thing about metaSAN is that it's very flexile to whatever your needs might be.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Christian FitzpatrickRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 25, 2012 at 1:47:19 pm

Hey guys,

This whole thread applies to us also.

We are committed to FCPX and need a San solution that won't break the bank.

How did you guys go, is FCPX playing nice with your Mac pro servers?

We are being quoted crazy prices for edit share systems thy we just can't afford. Any help here would be really appreciated...

Thank you in advance,

Christian


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 25, 2012 at 3:27:59 pm

[Christian Fitzpatrick] "We are being quoted crazy prices for edit share systems thy we just can't afford. Any help here would be really appreciated..."

How many clients do you need to attach?

There are certainly cost effective ways to go about shared storage, but it's certainly never really cheap.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Christian FitzpatrickRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 25, 2012 at 9:31:51 pm

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for the prompt reply mate.

Ok, so we are currently 3 users - editing native h.264 files out of Canon DSLR's in FCPX. The h.264 is a mixture of the standard IPB compression and the ALL-I compression (Which is around 3 times heavier than the standard IPB h.264 flavour). We do edit in ProRes 422 as well occasionally, but most days it's all h.264. Everything is in 1080P.

Current setup is dump all footage to Promise Pegasus R6 which is directly attached to my iMac (i7 3.4ghz). I have a inbuilt 1gbe connected to a pretty standard unmanaged netgear switch. Everybody puls the native media off Pegasus, across the network, and uses their local drive for Events and Projects. The Events and Projects are becoming a messy nightmare - I need to get them onto a SAN and use this "Add SAN Location" because at the moment, I have anywhere up to 4 different versions of some projects. Not cool.

I don't want to use Sparse disk images - i think that's a clunky workaround that won't scale - I'd like to get something in place that will work properly in the long term and increase our efficicency.

Here's the thing - at the moment, the speeds we are getting with the current system aren't bad, the Pegasus seems plenty capable (Although editing on my iMac isn't the best when two people are pulling data through it), that's not what's forcing the upgrade - it's the event and project management that's forcing our hand here.

In my (perhaps naive) thinking I imagined that a Pegasus directly attached to a Mac Mini with a thunderbolt multi port nic or 10GBE nic into a managed switch, with MetaLAN would be a suitable solution (Or swap out the mac mini for a bigger imac with two thunderbolt ports so I don't saturate the one connection with both the storage and the NIC) Or get a second hand Mac Pro with a RAID card and whack and external enclosure on there.

I would like to then have the macs either directly connect to the storage or using an additional thunderbolt to ethernet adaptor, run two gbe connections into the managed switch.

In my head I can't see how this would be a bad solution, yet everyone I speak to tells me I'm crazy and I should be dropping around $18K on their proprietary system. For three users, making a choice because of FCPX's crappy collaboration abilities, I just don't feel it's worth the money. Apple could releasea an update in 3 months that completely nullifies this investment.

I hope that gives you a bit more to go on and that you might be able to share your experiences.

Thanks so much again,

Christian


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 26, 2012 at 3:31:07 am

You will want someone to help you with this, or at least have someone you can call when things are being setup.

I am not a systems integrator, I am just an editor, but I maintain our SAN.

Having a SAN isn't cheap, it's just a fact. There are of course, more cost effective ways to get things done when comparing SANs, however.

MetaSAN does best with a dedicated "metadata controller".

One of the most cost effective way I know how to do this in a Mac environment is to use the Sonnet xMac mini server: http://sonnettech.com/product/xmacminiserver.html

You could use your current Thunderbolt storage, and serve out the data in a variety of different ways.

No matter what you choose, it's a big decision. Yes, Apple could release an update to FCPX, but even if they do, that won't stop you from using shared storage.

We've had a SAN for just over a year now, and it has completely changed our lives for the better. I don't know what we did without it.

FCPX's SAN integration is not crappy, it's actually pretty good, and metaSANs project share helps as well. it's a good system, I recommend it, but I just want you to know that you should do it as right as you can possibly afford.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Christian FitzpatrickRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 26, 2012 at 1:28:59 pm

Thanks Jeremy.

Are you using one of the Sonnet Xmac Mini Servers? It looks good but again, my concerns would be having the one Thunderbolt port on the Mac Mini running the pcie card and the storage.

Do you know of anybody running a Pegasus in a similar configuration to this?

I'd be happy to pay a decent MetaSan consultant and am not averse to spending around 8-10K if we can get something decent working.

I am just quite paralysed about spending the cash without an idea of whether it will work and perform to what I require.

What is your SAN setup like and who built it for you?

Christian


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 26, 2012 at 2:19:57 pm

[Christian Fitzpatrick] "Are you using one of the Sonnet Xmac Mini Servers? It looks good but again, my concerns would be having the one Thunderbolt port on the Mac Mini running the pcie card and the storage"

There's two thunderbolt ports. One would be connected to storage, one for PCIe which would be 10gige or whatever you choose to serve your data out to.

[Christian Fitzpatrick] "I'd be happy to pay a decent MetaSan consultant and am not averse to spending around 8-10K if we can get something decent working."

That's probably the least amount. Don't forget the metaLAN licenses you'll need.

[Christian Fitzpatrick] "What is your SAN setup like and who built it for you?"

We have a different system from Sonnet called the VFibre. It's a combination 8Gb fibre and LAN system.

We have two MacPro fibre clients, and three Ethernet LAN clients connected to the VFibre.

The VFibre is an all in one box with 42TB of formatted raid6 storage and CPU for metadata control. The VFibre is a windows machine. All of our clients are macs.

It has been working very well for us, but it was more expensive.

We the new Thunderbolt fibre offerings, we can start to add thunderbolt to fibre clents as well (iMacs and MacBook pros to fibre channel, sweet!).

Pretty slick and flexible.

Call Sonnet and have a talk with them. They're nice folks. Tiger support has also been great.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Christian FitzpatrickRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 25, 2012 at 9:36:25 pm

*CORRECTION* I would like to then have the macs either directly connected to the Mac Mini(imac/macpro) or using an additional thunderbolt to ethernet adaptor, run two gbe connections from the clients into the managed switch.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Bernard LamborelleRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 26, 2012 at 11:49:26 am

Hi Jeremy,

FYI - The symbolic link issue affecting FCPX on NTFS volume has been fixed by engineering and will be available in the upcoming metaSAN release.

Bernard


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: MetaLAN -- ProjectStore -- FCPX
by on Oct 26, 2012 at 1:16:56 pm

[Bernard Lamborelle] "FYI - The symbolic link issue affecting FCPX on NTFS volume has been fixed by engineering and will be available in the upcoming metaSAN release.
"


Music to my ears!

Thanks so much.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook


FORUMSTUTORIALSFEATURESVIDEOSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

Creative COW LinkedIn Group Creative COW Facebook Page Creative COW on Twitter
© 2014 CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved. - Privacy Policy

[Top]