FORUMS: list search recent posts

NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
shawn convey
NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 17, 2015 at 6:11:51 pm

I think I already know the answer to this question (No)
But I thought I would ask to see if anyone had any real world experience

I am editing my feature length doc and I have maxed out my DROBO 5D (I have 300+ hours of HD footage)
It has become painfully clear that I need quite a bit more space so I purchased an 8-bay Synology 1813+

I have never worked on a networked system before
I have never touched my Ethernet port...

But I know that people worked this way with SD footage.
I suspect the bandwidth will not handle HD footage (Canon eos 300)...
but again I am here for advice and suggestions.

I currently have an iMac 27" (late 2013)
3.5 GHz Intel Core i7
32GB of Ram
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4096 MB Graphics card

The NAS is a Synology 1813+

I have 12-14 GB of data that needs to be accessed mostly by one computer however if the Synology could work I would love to occasionally have it accessed by my laptop as well...

Please advise
thanks!


Return to posts index

Noah Kadner
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 2:25:01 am

I'd go with a Promise Pegasus instead- a lot more robust and built for editing video. The Synology is more like a home media streamer/personal cloud. Speed is not its selling point.

Noah

FCPWORKS - FCPX Workflow
Call Box Training


Return to posts index

shawn convey
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 3:35:26 am

Yeah I would love a Promise
but it just in not in the budget...
especially since they come preconfigured (none barebones)
so even if I could afford the $3.5k model it is not nearly as expandable.

many have said that the 1813+ has super impressive speeds with gigabit LAN ports (4 of them)
but still I really don't know what that means in terms of what I need.
Obviously the quicker the better but if Thunderbolt 2 is a Porsche will the Synology do what I need it to do.

If not then I am prepared to make my DROBO my edit drive and my Synology my storage drive
BUT still I want to know if I can use my Synology (and use it on 2 computers) and then I would sell my DROBO and use that money for more 6TB drives for the Synology...

any perspective about actual speed needed contrasted with the speed capable of the 1813+ would be super helpful.

Cheers


Return to posts index


Noah Kadner
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 5:28:51 am

Yeah in that case you should just order one on Amazon and try it.

Noah

FCPWORKS - FCPX Workflow
Call Box Training


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 1:00:44 pm

Let us know how it goes. I would love to upgrade the Synology on my home network and be able to edit home movies off of it via 802.11 ac on my laptop.


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 1:28:43 pm

[shawn convey] "many have said that the 1813+ has super impressive speeds with gigabit LAN ports (4 of them) but still I really don't know what that means in terms of what I need."

As Noah said, directly attached storage is normally a lot faster. Actual real-world file transfer speed of gigabit ethernet is often slower than people expect. A typical figure might be 100 megabytes/sec (on a good day), which is about as fast as a cheap bus-powered USB 3 portable drive.

If your situation absolutely mandates NAS for other reasons such as collaborative file sharing, then the performance penalty may be worth it. However even a less expensive directly attached RAID system will be a lot faster. E.g, OWC Thunderbay 4, or even G-RAID.


Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 5:11:28 pm

[Joe Marler] "Actual real-world file transfer speed of gigabit ethernet is often slower than people expect."

FWIW, we run 6-7 systems with a mix of NLE's (X, 7, Pr) off a mac mini/pegasus2 R8 NAS over GB Enet and it's fine. Our sources are all generally 720p or 1080p ProRes 422.

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

shawn convey
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 6:33:25 pm

Thanks for all the feedback

@ Charlie Austin
Just to be clear you are not using the R8's Thunderbolt connection at all and just the gigabit LAN port and you have not has issues with 1080p / ProRes 422?
are you using any specific switches or other devices to avoid bottlenecking?

And to be honest I would mainly be using it on the iMac with occasional use on my laptop...
Thanks for your insight!


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 7:50:54 pm

[shawn convey] "Just to be clear you are not using the R8's Thunderbolt connection at all and just the gigabit LAN port and you have not has issues with 1080p / ProRes 422?
are you using any specific switches or other devices to avoid bottlenecking?"


Yes and no. Tbolt 2 from the R8 to the (new) mini running Server app. GB Enet from the Mini to a Netgear switch (ProSafe 24 port GB Enet is the model fwiw) And the edit systems hang off that. All Libraries/projects/cache/scratch discs are local, so we're mostly just reading. the only time it gets a bit choppy is if all 6 systems are working and someone tries to copy (write) a feature or something large to the server. I don't think even that would be an issue with fewer systems.

If all you're doing is running off 1 main system with an occasional need for a laptop to access it, I'd imagine that Tbolt 2 to the main system, and then maybe file sharing over GB Enet to the laptop would work fine. Don't know if you'd even need the switch.

As we are running a dedicated server I've not tried that, but I imagine it would work, just need to set up sharing on the "master" system.

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index


shawn convey
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 7:56:41 pm

@Charlie
Again thanks for the input.

I guess what this boils down to however is my Synology 1813+ has no Thunderbolt connector.
and what I am curious about is if the gigbit LAN will be able to handle the prores 422 1080p footage for FCP7
I have way too much footage :-) (300 hours) My editor starts back up (we are 1/2 way through the edit)
and I don't want to waster her time but we are running crazy low on space...

Being new to NAS and office networking in general
I would assume that if your LAN port is suppling the rest of the edit suites it can't be transferring any quicker than the gigabit LAN port coming out of my Synlogoy... is that thinking correct or am I missing something?

again thanks for your patience with this networking n00b :-)


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 8:15:02 pm
Last Edited By Charlie Austin on Mar 18, 2015 at 8:18:14 pm

[shawn convey] "I would assume that if your LAN port is suppling the rest of the edit suites it can't be transferring any quicker than the gigabit LAN port coming out of my Synlogoy... is that thinking correct or am I missing something?
"


Not 100% sure, since Tbolt out of the Raid is faster than Enet. But I guess as long as the Enet can get data out of the synology box fast enough it should work. Get a couple cat 6 cables and give it a shot. :-)
EDIT: with a little 4 port switch you might not even need to set up sharing on the main system. Just plug main, laptop, and Raid into the switch. I'm venturing off into speculation land, so hopefully a brighter mind can pop in to confirm or deny this.. ;-)
-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

shawn convey
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 8:41:44 pm

OK now you are touching on something that I have found a bit confusing.
My Synology Box does have 4 gigbit LAN ports.
Does that mean that if I bought box it could transfer 4x the speed of a single Gigabit LAN
OR does this mean that it reduces bottlenecking when using multiple machines?
either way thanks again for your time and responses.


Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 8:56:38 pm
Last Edited By Charlie Austin on Mar 18, 2015 at 8:59:00 pm

[shawn convey] "Does that mean that if I bought box it could transfer 4x the speed of a single Gigabit LAN
OR does this mean that it reduces bottlenecking when using multiple machines?"


No clue on that... someone posted something about "double ethernet" the other day, but that's beyond my limited knowledge. :-) I was just thinking you could plug the Raid and 2 computers into a switch and both systems could access the Raid without any sharing setup needed. I'm not familiar with the synology box so that may even be how it's intended to be used... no switch att all, just plug the computers into the Raid... maybe the 4 ports are a switch?

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Noah Kadner
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 18, 2015 at 9:00:44 pm

If you have a computer with multiple ethernet ports you can try. I'd say experiment via an Amazon 30-day return policy. Too many variables to give you a definitive answer. You'll probably be fine with this solution but I also wouldn't be surprised if it's bottlenecked in some way. These are just the last things I'd recommend for serious editing. I'd sooner just connect a decent external Thunderbolt drive and share it.

Noah

FCPWORKS - FCPX Workflow
Call Box Training


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 19, 2015 at 11:50:51 am

[shawn convey] "I would assume that if your LAN port is supplying the rest of the edit suites it can't be transferring any quicker than the gigabit LAN port coming out of my Synology... is that thinking correct or am I missing something?"

You are correct. In general link aggregation (if available) increases ethernet backbone capacity, not point-to-point transfer performance. You can see some typical NAS performance numbers here: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/nas/view and compare to posted numbers on directly attached storage using BlackMagic, QuickBench or other disk benchmarks.

You can also Google BlackMagic and whatever NAS you're interested in and compare to variously directly-attached storage systems using that same benchmark.

Even though 100 MB/sec is no faster than a bus-powered USB portable drive, it is enough for editing H.264 HD video, even a few concurrent streams. It's not because the NAS is so fast, but because the I/O demands are fairly modest. The data rate on H.264 HD video is limited by the compression and resolution.

OTOH if you ever intend to edit 4k or multiple streams of less-compressed video such as ProRes 422, you can encounter the I/O limit sooner. E.g, a single ProRes 422 stream at 1080p/30 is about 147 megabytes/sec. The BlackMagic benchmark helps by indicating whether your read/write performance is sufficient for various popular codecs and resolutions.

NAS definitely has advantages if sharing content between multiple editors.


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: NAS (Synology) fast enough for FCPX?
on Mar 19, 2015 at 12:42:42 pm

I'd suggest posting this in the NAS forum:
https://forums.creativecow.net/networkattachedstorage

In fact, just reading through that forum will teach you a lot about throughput, latency, link aggregation, etc.

I will warn you in advance that if Bob answers your question, you might get a gruff answer -- but you should listen to him because he knows his stuff.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]