FORUMS: list search recent posts

Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?

COW Forums : SAN - Storage Area Networks

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Rahasiaja Kitasmua
Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jun 28, 2012 at 2:36:59 am

Hi all

I'd like to hear what you guys think about these technology/interface here.. I'm pretty much a networking dummy, so i'd like to learn more.
In choosing shared storage for post production, what is the pros & cons of these three? Which one do you guys think will be the prevalent technology?

So far the only pros & cons i can think of:

Fiber Channel

PRO: up to 8Gb bandwidth, dependability & less signal loss (cmiiw).
CONS: Costly, fragile cable. Costly FC card, FC switches & license. Connectors with different standard or forms.


10Gb Ethernet

PRO: Support for 1Gb ethernet backward & compatibility. Might be THE next standard in networking, which leads to ubiquity & low price.
CONS: Switches are still expensive. Less known compared to the other two, i have no idea what's needed for physical connection.


Thunderbolt

PRO: High bandwidth, connector form factor, higher adoption rate in consumer level.
CONS: Cable length, newer tech than the other two, which leads to lack of supporting device with this interface. Only popular among Apple users.



Please do tell if there's anything you're willing to share.

Best regards


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jun 28, 2012 at 2:44:57 am

This is my opinion. You cannot do this yourself. You must hire someone that has done this before to help you. I am sure that there is a dealer near you that is experienced with shared storage systems for video. That dealer will be familiar with both 10GbE, Fibre Channel, and other solutions (like Infiniband) that can help you with your decision, and more important - HELP YOU INSTALL THIS. Much of this equipment is complicated, and no matter how smart you are, you will not be able to accomplish this by yourself.

To directly answer your question - both Fibre Channel and 10GbE are good solutions for you - Thunderbolt is not a shared storage solution.

What country are you located in - I will try to find someone to assist you.

Bob Zelin



Return to posts index

Rahasiaja Kitasmua
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jun 28, 2012 at 5:40:47 am

Thanks Bob, much appreciated. I was also given pretty much the same advice by a former system integrator. I'm in Indonesia, i'd be glad to contact anybody you refer/recommend.

Also, I'm making this thread for a brainstorming purpose as well, it's an aspect of decision making that i don't find in a lot of sites that discusses storage.
In our case, it's a brand new place which means there's a chance to choose the right path for the next 3-5 years. Certainly we have a luxury that an existing facility wouldn't get when deciding on adding/upgrading hardwares.

Actually now I'm kind of leaning toward 10GbE since the trend seems to indicate this technology has been picked up by the big players (Facebook, Google, etc). If i'm a betting man then i'd bet on 10GbE getting more cheaper & having more options in the next 5 years.


Return to posts index


Steve Modica
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:58:21 am

10Gb uses NAS protocols (like AFP and Samba) and files are accessed as files off of a server. It's easier to setup, simpler to understand and has only one server as a point of failure (which you can make redundant via LACP, dual power etc).

Fibre channel and iSCSI are not shared. The idea is that clients access the storage directly with a metadata server playing traffic cop. Everyone is diddling with the inode table via the metadata server. We've set these up with our iSCSI to test performance and compatibility (iSCSI 10Gb is faster than FC BTW). It's complicated. You have to have lots of LUNS to stripe together plus a metadata LUN that's mirrored.

My decision point would be dependent on the number of clients and bandwidth required. If you can get away with NAS, do NAS. It's much easier to deal with (and cheaper). If you need more than you can get from a single server, consider 2 or 3 servers.

Steve

Steve Modica
CTO, Small Tree Communications


Return to posts index

Robbie Coblentz
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jun 30, 2012 at 11:19:35 pm

10 Gig or 1 Gig is great for smaller/mid size shops on FCP 7 or Premiere CS6. You can get Avid MC rolling, but it requires some workflow adjustments.

10Gig screams. Avid moved their ISIS systems to ethernet based protocols recently. I wouldn't spend ugh on Fibre these days.



Return to posts index

Rahasiaja Kitasmua
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jul 2, 2012 at 12:44:02 am

Rob, that's also my thought, fibre infrastructure is too expensive when 10GbE is (seemingly) starting to take off.


Return to posts index


Rahasiaja Kitasmua
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jul 2, 2012 at 12:41:46 am

Thank you Steve for sharing

[Steve Modica] "10Gb uses NAS protocols (like AFP and Samba) and files are accessed as files off of a server. It's easier to setup, simpler to understand and has only one server as a point of failure (which you can make redundant via LACP, dual power etc).

would you care to elaborate further? what other protocols that NAS usually support? what do you mean with dual power?
i'm also curious about the difference about 10GbE SFP+ (with copper or fibre cables) & 10GBASE-T (Cat6A) since i can't find a comparison of the two that states the pros & cons. i imagine a Cat6A would have a better durability & length factor. is it latency that makes SFP+ still preferred now?

i have been told that a certain company would release a NAS storage that has a dual 10GbE connection but not aggregated, it only uses the ports & cables as channels. They wrote their own filesystem as well, which is their main weakness point so far, since it means they have to write a driver for other OS in order to get those operating systems to recognize the storage/server filesystem (as proprietary system would). Otherwise their product is very much interesting aside the price, which is not released yet, i'm sure it isn't that expensive in terms of value, but it would still be quite a lot money since they have more than 50TB. i don't think it's wise for our company to buy it because of that, not in this stage anyway.

Fibre channel and iSCSI are not shared. The idea is that clients access the storage directly with a metadata server playing traffic cop. Everyone is diddling with the inode table via the metadata server. We've set these up with our iSCSI to test performance and compatibility (iSCSI 10Gb is faster than FC BTW). It's complicated. You have to have lots of LUNS to stripe together plus a metadata LUN that's mirrored"

i agree completely, this has been a great disadvantage for fibre, nightmare when there's a problem.


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jul 2, 2012 at 10:42:19 pm

would you care to elaborate further? what other protocols that NAS usually support? what do you mean with dual power?
i'm also curious about the difference about 10GbE SFP+ (with copper or fibre cables) & 10GBASE-T (Cat6A) since i can't find a comparison of the two that states the pros & cons. i imagine a Cat6A would have a better durability & length factor. is it latency that makes SFP+ still preferred now?

REPLY -
NAS support .afp, .smb, and .nfs. 10GbE with SFP+ fibre transceivers are currently more popular and more readily available. Cat6A is not as widely available from many manufacturers, and there are less switch companies that make RJ45 CAT6A swithes - specifically, right now, the only RJ45 Cat6A switches come from Small Tree, Interface Masters and Arista Networks - that's it. For SFP+ Fibre 10g switches, there are LOTS of companies that make these.
The Cat6A switches cost a LOT more money - around $15,000 US. One day these prices will drop - today is not that day.


i have been told that a certain company would release a NAS storage that has a dual 10GbE connection but not aggregated, it only uses the ports & cables as channels.

REPLY - you can get this right now from many companies, using standard protocols, using Linux, OS X or Windows 2008 Server depending on what brand you choose. No aggrigation - just direct connect 10gig from server to client.

They wrote their own filesystem as well, which is their main weakness point so far, since it means they have to write a driver for other OS in order to get those operating systems to recognize the storage/server filesystem (as proprietary system would). Otherwise their product is very much interesting aside the price, which is not released yet, i'm sure it isn't that expensive in terms of value, but it would still be quite a lot money since they have more than 50TB. i don't think it's wise for our company to buy it because of that, not in this stage anyway.

RPELY - my advice is that you find a company that will give you support in Indonesia. Many US companies do not have support in Indonesia. I would be happy to pitch my system, as we can do direct connect 10gig ethernet, but I can't support you properly, unless you consider long distance remote access the kind of support that you find acceptable.

Creative Cow shows lots and lots of companies that sell shared storage - almost all are excellent. I do not know who can support you in Indonesia, except for remote support over the internet.

Bob Zelin



Return to posts index

Rahasiaja Kitasmua
Re: Shared storage considerations, Fiber Channel, 10GbE or Thunderbolt?
on Jul 5, 2012 at 8:04:17 am

[Bob Zelin] "REPLY -
NAS support .afp, .smb, and .nfs. 10GbE with SFP+ fibre transceivers are currently more popular and more readily available. Cat6A is not as widely available from many manufacturers, and there are less switch companies that make RJ45 CAT6A swithes - specifically, right now, the only RJ45 Cat6A switches come from Small Tree, Interface Masters and Arista Networks - that's it. For SFP+ Fibre 10g switches, there are LOTS of companies that make these.
The Cat6A switches cost a LOT more money - around $15,000 US. One day these prices will drop - today is not that day."


Yeah it is still crazy expensive..


"REPLY - you can get this right now from many companies, using standard protocols, using Linux, OS X or Windows 2008 Server depending on what brand you choose. No aggrigation - just direct connect 10gig from server to client.

But it's also their software & filesystem that we're interested in, not merely the networking tech they build it in.. :)


REPLY - my advice is that you find a company that will give you support in Indonesia. Many US companies do not have support in Indonesia. I would be happy to pitch my system, as we can do direct connect 10gig ethernet, but I can't support you properly, unless you consider long distance remote access the kind of support that you find acceptable.

Creative Cow shows lots and lots of companies that sell shared storage - almost all are excellent. I do not know who can support you in Indonesia, except for remote support over the internet."


Now worries, appreciated it, Bob.. Thanks for taking the time.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]