Quantcast
Channel: StudioSysAdmins Message Board
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3749

SAN vs NAS for POST Production

$
0
0
SAN vs NAS for POST Production
posted by Bobby Jain on Nov. 27, 2013, 2:40 p.m. (14 days ago)
Hi,

We are gearing up for another up coming show and need to buy more storage dedicated for this production. We are currently looking at three options, two of which are ZFS based NAS's, and the other is a SAN. I have never worked with a SAN before, and I was hoping some of your more experienced admins could weigh in.


Requirements:
- 60TB usable
- 10 editors working with ProRes422HQ (1080p, 23.976)
- 176Mbps per stream = 22MBps x 10 users = 220MBps total

Option 1 - Small Tree ZFS based NAS
http://www.small-tree.com/TitaniumZ_16_p/tz-16.htm

Option 2 - DDP24D SAN, clients connecting with iSCSI
http://www.dynamicdrivepool.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=77&Itemid=96&a824d24ada40db5eeb40d3d91780426e=5a8c619f643a76a1f1bf1eb328070487

Option 3 - NexentaStor ZFS based NAS


All three vendors have given me configurations on being able to handle the throughput, albeit with very different configurations.

We bought 60TB of NexentaStor in the summer for our animation department. To us that made sense because of ZFS's native caching, which works pretty well for animation. But after talking to both Small Tree and Nexenta, both stated that caching wouldn't be available or useful for a POST production work flow. At that point is there reason to still consider ZFS?

The NAS guys are telling me to not bother with a SAN due to the increased complexity. Without relevant experience, I'm not sure who to believe.

Thanks in advance.
Thread Tags:
  discuss-at-studiosysadmins 

0 Responses   1 Plus One's   1 Comments  
 
Hi,

We are gearing up for another up coming show and need to buy more storage dedicated for this production. We are currently looking at three options, two of which are ZFS based NAS's, and the other is a SAN. I have never worked with a SAN before, and I was hoping some of your more experienced admins could weigh in.


Requirements:
- 60TB usable
- 10 editors working with ProRes422HQ (1080p, 23.976)
- 176Mbps per stream = 22MBps x 10 users = 220MBps total

Option 1 - Small Tree ZFS based NAS
http://www.small-tree.com/TitaniumZ_16_p/tz-16.htm

Option 2 - DDP24D SAN, clients connecting with iSCSI
http://www.dynamicdrivepool.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=77&Itemid=96&a824d24ada40db5eeb40d3d91780426e=5a8c619f643a76a1f1bf1eb328070487

Option 3 - NexentaStor ZFS based NAS


All three vendors have given me configurations on being able to handle the throughput, albeit with very different configurations.

We bought 60TB of NexentaStor in the summer for our animation department. To us that made sense because of ZFS's native caching, which works pretty well for animation. But after talking to both Small Tree and Nexenta, both stated that caching wouldn't be available or useful for a POST production work flow. At that point is there reason to still consider ZFS?

The NAS guys are telling me to not bother with a SAN due to the increased complexity. Without relevant experience, I'm not sure who to believe.

Thanks in advance.

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3749

Trending Articles