Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: BernardLanguillier on April 08, 2013, 08:54:23 pm
-
Team,
Would those in the know have visibility on upcoming Thunderbolt raid storage options?
We hear rumors of updated Mac pros coming, I would personally be pairing it it with a fast 6 bays thunderbolt attached storage that would have to:
- Be silent,
- Be reliable,
- Be reasonnably afforable,
- Have an embedded Raid 5/6 engine.
I don't find many options out there meeting these basic criteria.
Would any of you have visibility on what else is coming our way from reputable vendors like Qnap, Synology, G-Technology, Wiebetech,...?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Would those in the know have visibility on upcoming Thunderbolt raid storage options?
Intel is happy to gather such news at https://thunderbolttechnology.net/news and NAB seems to be generating some news on this front, like the second generation (double speed) version and the new Blackmagic 4K Super 35mm camera with Thunderbolt port.
P. S. Intel's NAB announcement of third generation "Redwood Ridge" (DSL4510 and DSL4410) Thunderbolt controllers that support 4K displays (through version 1.2 of DisplayPort) seems like the last key ingredient for a worthwhile MacPro upgrade and "Retina Cinema Displays". They seem likely to pair with Intel's coming Haswell processors, which I think means June at the earliest.
Do not confuse this with the fourth generation double speed "Falcon Ridge" Thunderbolt also announced, but not coming till late this year or early 2014.
-
There is the Drobo 5D. Much, much quieter than older Drobo units and you can configure for the Drobo version of RAID 5 or 6 (but with more flexibility). The hardware seems to be more robust as well. Alas only 5 bays but unlike small RAID systems it is scalable in capacity. I've been running one fro about 5 months with WD red 3TB HDDs. I also hav a 64GB M-SSD installed to speed up accessing previews in Lightroom.
-
There is the Drobo 5D. Much, much quieter than older Drobo units and you can configure for the Drobo version of RAID 5 or 6 (but with more flexibility). The hardware seems to be more robust as well. Alas only 5 bays but unlike small RAID systems it is scalable in capacity. I've been running one fro about 5 months with WD red 3TB HDDs. I also hav a 64GB M-SSD installed to speed up accessing previews in Lightroom.
Thanks, Drobo seems to be an interesting option.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Promise Pegasus R6 - now accepts 4tb drives 16TB at RAID 6 .....
-
Promise Pegasus R6 - now accepts 4tb drives 16TB at RAID 6 .....
A couple of questions:
- Do they sell empty bays?
- How is the noise level?
Thanks.
-
How fast is Thunderbolt? like moving data from external to internal devices... e.g. moving data
Henrik
-
How fast is Thunderbolt? like moving data from external to internal devices... e.g. moving data
No first hand experience, but in theory it is faster than the fastest available SSD based raid external devices.
All the more with HDD based raid, it should clearly remove any interface related bottleneck, so external storage becomes de facto as fast as internal one.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernard: As far as I know, only available w/drives. The enclosure itself is very quiet - dual variable speed fans at the rear, any noise will be from the drives themselves.
I'm a huge fan of Promise, very well made, well thought out - we use the larger rackmount sas units for enterprise storage, I once got an email from one unit warning me that one of the redundant controller batteries was overheating......
Tived: Thunderbolt is basically a PCIe external bus - supporting 20GBs (10Gbs each direction - full duplex). Intel just announced a new TB chipset that will double to 40GBs - compatible with existing connectors and cabling
-
...Thunderbolt is basically a PCIe external bus...
...and I believe Thunderbolt is still pretty much Mac only - there are only a few PC laptops and motherboards that support it, and as far as I know there are no widely compatible Thunderpolt PCIe add-on cards for existing PCs with PCIe slots.
Kevin
-
Thanks guys,
the speed sounds good 10-20GB/s each way, that will take a lot of drives to push this much data through though - BUT not impossible ;D
as for the early adoption, yes Apple is probably out first for the novelty, while there are alternatives in the Windows world, though not nearly as fast. We will just wait and see, this sort of investments isn't just something you do because it sounds good, letting it mature is always a good route to take.
Never the less its very interesting technology - got to keep an eye on it.
Henrik
-
...and I believe Thunderbolt is still pretty much Mac only - there are only a few PC laptops and motherboards that support it, and as far as I know there are no widely compatible Thunderpolt PCIe add-on cards for existing PCs with PCIe slots.
Kevin
Yes and no. Intel worked closely with Apple on the initial rollout of the technology (was internally called lightpeak at Intel, intended to be an optical interface).
Asus currently has TB offerings - you will not find a PCIe to TB "card", it needs to be implemented at the Mainboard's Chipset southbridge, the same way the internal PCIe bus is implemented. Sorry if I confused anyone, what I really meant that TB is *equivalent* to a PCIe bus....
I'm dissapointed at the state of TB in the windows side; expecting 2nd generation socket 2011 (X79 - C6XX) mainboards to have TB - such is not the case (but then neither has Apple) I'm also dissapointed at the lack of some innovation around this new technology; why hasn't anyone developed a TB display with internal GPU - what a perfect opportunity to intimately match GPU LUT's, at the vendors chosen bit depth, directly to the panel....
-
Yes and no. Intel worked closely with Apple on the initial rollout of the technology (was internally called lightpeak at Intel, intended to be an optical interface).
Asus currently has TB offerings - you will not find a PCIe to TB "card", it needs to be implemented at the Mainboard's Chipset southbridge, the same way the internal PCIe bus is implemented. Sorry if I confused anyone, what I really meant that TB is *equivalent* to a PCIe bus....
I'm dissapointed at the state of TB in the windows side; expecting 2nd generation socket 2011 (X79 - C6XX) mainboards to have TB - such is not the case (but then neither has Apple) I'm also dissapointed at the lack of some innovation around this new technology; why hasn't anyone developed a TB display with internal GPU - what a perfect opportunity to intimately match GPU LUT's, at the vendors chosen bit depth, directly to the panel....
I have Gigabyte z77 board with Thunderbolt. I have yet to use the ports.
http://www.gigabyte.us/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4279#ov
-
I run my LR4 catalog and all images off of an external Thunderbolt drive - On my Mac Mini server (16GB RAM), the difference between that setup and running with all files on the internal SSD is negligible, and mostly nonexistent. The only difference I see is that the TB external drive is a hair slower at loading preview images.
-
Worth a careful read: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/storage/why-raid-6-stops-working-in-2019/805
-
I have an Asus laptop with Thunderbolt. Now that everyone seems to have orphaned Express Cards it's the only way to shoot a Phase One back tethered to a PC.
Love the Asus. I've always had good luck with their products and this is no exception
-
Worth a careful read: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/storage/why-raid-6-stops-working-in-2019/805
Can someone help me understand the math here? The spec for the Seagate 4 TB disks is one unrecoverable error every 10^14 bits. If I assume 10 bits per byte (8 for encoding and 2 for error correction) as an estimate, then I should have one uncorrectable error every 10^13 bytes or on error every 2 * 10^10 sectors. But the error rate used in Robin Harris's ZDNet article, quoted above has an error rate of one error every 2 * 10^8 sectors (one every 2 * 10^11 bytes).
Why is my number two orders of magnitude less than his?
Our empirical tests don't mirror his prediction either. We have been running RAID 5 volumes flat out with a write/read/verify test for days on end. I know the test is working because it has flushed out many obscure bugs in our driver, some of which take 2 - 6 days to reproduce. Our typical test run is 48 hours on three separate Macs with a total of over 20 TB read and verified (1.2 billion i/os). I think we've run this test 5 times so far and I've yet to see a single read error from the disk. We have code which logs the read errors to the system.log file which I know works as we've been shipping the error logging code for 3 years.
I'ld love to hear other people's comments on the ZDNet article and their experience with the reliability of RAID 5 volumes
Thanks,
Tim Standing
SoftRAID LLC
-
My biggest problem with any form of RAID that involves parity, is the rebuild time when a spindle fails. I've had numerous RAID 5 implementations run without a hitch for several years - the vast majority in fact. However, we also experienced a degraded array in a high volume medical imaging application; seriously affecting processing for the several days it took to rebuild; all the while crossing our fingers hoping another another spindle would not fail (another actually did shortly after we removed the array from live service). After determining the overall effect, we came to the conclusion we would have been better of restoring from a backup and losing a full day!
Never again; we have since stuck with only RAID10 (RAID 1 + 0) using dual controllers, rebuild times are much faster, offsetting the loss of overall storage capacity.
Here's some quick examples of various RAID using 6 3TB drives
RAID Type: RAID5
Size (GB) = 15000
Number of disks = 6
Space efficiency = 0.833333333333333 (83.3333333333333%)
Fault tolerance = 1 disk(s)
RAID IO penalty (read) = 1/1 (one RAID IO per each host IO)
RAID IO penalty (write) = 4/1 (4 RAID IOs per each host IO)
RAID Type: RAID6
Size (GB) = 12000
Number of disks = 6
Space efficiency = 0.666666666666667 (66.6666666666667%)
Fault tolerance = 2 disk(s)
RAID IO penalty (read) = 1/1 (one RAID IO per each host IO)
RAID IO penalty (write) = 6/1 (6 RAID IOs per each host IO)
RAID Type: RAID10
Size (GB) = 9000
Number of disks = 6
Space efficiency = 0.5 (50%)
Fault tolerance = 1 disk (min) to 3 disks (max)
RAID IO penalty (read) = 1/1 (one RAID IO per each host IO)
RAID IO penalty (write) = 2/1 (2 RAID IOs per each host IO)
Although space efficiency for RAID10 is the lowest, take a look at Fault Tolerance and IO penalty.
-
I am currently using the Western Digital thunderbolt drive 6 tb and am happy with it. I have about 2 tb of data on it & it works well. I am not sure if this would handle your needs as I am an amateur photographer and only shoot on weekends so 6 tb is adequate for my needs but might not be for yours. I do believe they make them in 8tb sizes also so that may be an option for you. After purchasing the d800, I had to upgrade my system to handle all those extra pixels, so I purchased the Thunderbolt external drive & bumped the ram up to 16 Meg. This should hold me for awhile. My next upgrade will be the ssd. However the price is still a little high so I shall wait a few more months & maybe it will come down. I am however using a desktop & not a laptop. Here is a link.
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=630
Hope this helps.
-
Paul,
The WD, I am sure is very nice but two spindle disk will not challenge the Thunderbolt interface in terms of throughput.
John,
It's been a while since I was involved in building and setting up system for commercial clients, back then they were always crying over the cost of doing it right, right is perhaps not the right word, but building systems where they are more efficient when rebuilding from failure as you described above. Getting an extra controller and more disks will save valuable time. So it's nice to see that you put this to practice.
All the best
Henrik
-
Do they make thunderbolt drive enclosures/docking bays?
Or is this akin to putting premium tires on a beat up slow Ford Escort.
-
Do they make thunderbolt drive enclosures/docking bays?
Or is this akin to putting premium tires on a beat up slow Ford Escort.
There are Thunderbolt external drive enclosures, from Pegasus for example, but as you note, the drives are far slower than Thunderbolt can handle, so I wonder if USB3 is more appropriate, now that newer Macs are getting USB3.
I am guessing that we will soon see external Thunderbolt flash-based mass storage units using PCIe solid-state storage as in the new Mac Pro, for use with that Mac Pro for example, and maybe cosmetically matched to it. All in the high price range that I expect for the Mac Pro.
-
Do they make thunderbolt drive enclosures/docking bays?
Or is this akin to putting premium tires on a beat up slow Ford Escort.
I am using the Drobo 5D which has pairs of both Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 connections, here's a link: http://www.drobo.com/products/professionals/drobo-5d/
EDIT: So far (about six months) it has been extremely stable and far quieter than my older Drobo v2 enclosures. I also added a 64GB miniSSD in the units base and yes it really does speedup access by being a cache drive for Lightroom catalogs etc.
Promise also makes a Thunderbolt RAID enclosure: http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_series.aspx?m=192®ion=en-global&rsn1=40&rsn3=47
Several others are listed at Amazon under "Thunderbolt Enclosures".
Also check out the Promise Pegasus J4 enclosure: http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2013/20130613_3-Promise-Pegasus-J4.html
-
Thanks Ellis and BJL, I am a photo enthusiast/hobbyist. I am looking for backup storage. I don't need expensive RAID set ups. I currently backup to a external hard drive but I need more.
I want to store a copy offsite at work. It would be convenient for me to use a HD docking station and just swap a couple of 3 TB hard drives between home and work. There's plenty of cheap effective USB 3 docking stations out there. As i have a TB port mobo I wondered if they would be faster than a USB 3 docking station. But I suspect that the drives are the limiting factor which explains the dearth of TB docking stations.
-
For a docking station for bare HDDs I use this: http://www.newertech.com/products/voyagerq.php
FW 400/800, USB 3.0, and eSATA, but no TB.
-
I am using the Drobo 5D which has pairs of both Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 connections, here's a link: http://www.drobo.com/products/professionals/drobo-5d/
EDIT: So far (about six months) it has been extremely stable and far quieter than my older Drobo v2 enclosures. I also added a 64GB miniSSD in the units base and yes it really does speedup access by being a cache drive for Lightroom catalogs etc.
Hi Ellis,
Would you happen to know why Drobo mentions the 5D as being compatible only with 10.7 onwards? Any idea what would make it non compatible with 10.6?
The compatibility with both TB and USB makes it a great candidate to move legacy data from non TB macs to new TB macs...
Thanks.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi Ellis,
Would you happen to know why Drobo mentions the 5D as being compatible only with 10.7 onwards? Any idea what would make it non compatible with 10.6?
The compatibility with both TB and USB makes it a great candidate to move legacy data from non TB macs to new TB macs...
Thanks.
Cheers,
Bernard
Dear Bernard,
Not a clue. I'll see if I can get an answer from Drobo.
-
Dear Bernard,
Not a clue. I'll see if I can get an answer from Drobo.
Aprreciate it, thanks.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernard,
I spent quite some time on this topic and this is what I found:
1. The Drobo 5D is quite slow compared to other options out there. It also is somewhat of a black box in terms of their fault tolerance standard. I have had a Drobo 5 FS (GigE) for a few years now and it is painfully slow. Lucky if I see throughput over 20mbps.
2. The two large-scale solutions appear to be either the Pegasus R6 or the Areca. Pegasus comes in a 6 drive configuration and you have the option of ordering 2 or 3TB drives for a total of 12TB or 18TB. The unit does not come unpopulated. The Areca can be purchased as an empty unit.
3. Either of these units will only mount to one machine at a time. So if you have a Mac Pro and a Macbook, simultaneous access will need you to create some kind of share.
4. Throughput on either one appears to be in the 600-650mbps range, which is quite impressive. Certainly faster than a single SSD. This would be in a RAID 0 or 10 config. RAID 5 may be a little slower, especially on write speeds.
5. After the announcement of the new MacPro, I decided to go a different route. I went with external mini-sas enclosures. In an 8 drive array, I get about 900Mbps. I felt mini SAS gave me a few more options and some degree of future-proofing. Performance was also better. My redundancy is also not just at the disk level, but right down the the hardware and chassis.
6. Both WD and Seagate now have NAS specific drives that run much cooler and support various nuances for RAID. This avoids common problems you'd see when using desktop drives, mostly related to the array dropping disks. These new drives are not to be confused with enterprise drives. They cost about 10-15% more than their desktop equivalents, so not too bad.
This, along with the new ATI 7950 card have given my aging mac pro new life. I already had 24GB so memory was not really an issue.
If I do end up with the new Mac Pro, I can always pop the two PCIe RAID controllers driving the Mini SAS arrays into an external thunderbolt housing. Sonnet and Magma already have a few models out. Having said this, TB will bottleneck the current performance I am getting with having the RAID controllers directly on x8 PCIe slots.
My main concern with the new MacPro is that I don't believe TB2 will stand for too long. It really should be called TB1.1. If that happens, then we are stuck with TB2 on the new MacPro. A windows machine may be an option, and will be cheaper, but not sure I want to go there just yet.
Good luck...
-
Thanks jsiva,
The mini SAS option seems interesting.
Would you mind sharing more details about the exact pieces it is made of?
Thank you.
Regards,
Bernard
-
If you want to go for a system similar to the Pegasus R6 or Areca:
1. You can get an external chassis - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/819990-REG/OWC_Other_World_Computing_OWCMRP1UMSAS_Mercury_Rack_Pro_4.html
This holds 4 drives and costs $310.
2. You need a RAID controller. This one from OWC performs well and is quite affordable at $250. It is an OEM Highpoint and can support up to 8 drives at 6gbps. There is also a version for a little less money that supports 4 internal and 4 external drives, so if you want to have 8 drives, you can do it with only one of the external chassis above.
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/NewerTech/MXPRMS6G2E/
3. You need a couple of SAS cables (8088 for external or 8087 for internal). Both cost about $50 a piece.
4. Drives - I think 3TB are the best value right now, and have 3x1GB platters. This will be better for performance vs. the 4TB drives that have 4x800GB platters. I would recommend the NAS versions such as the WD RED. The 3TB drives run about $150 each.
So you can either get a 12 TB array for about a $1000-1300 depending on whether or not you want internal or external. A 24TB set would be another 6-900, again depending on whether you chose an external chassis or not.
If you sent the full boat with 24TB and two external chassis, you are still looking at about $2200, well below what the Areca or R6 would cost, and would get better performance. You can also swap/upgrade drives, RAID cards etc. as you wish. This particular card supports RAID 0/1/5/10/50. You can get additional features and caching with more advanced controllers.
For me, I now have an open platform for storage that is independent of my choice of computer. If I choose to go with a PC, I can still use this same kit with no issues.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
-
I have been cosidering the Pegasus for some time. I am glad I did not spring for it since this solution makes far more sense for less $$
Many thanks for posting this.
Chris
-
No worries Chris. Bottom line for me was that even if I decided to go for the new Mac Pro, I can get an external chassis for 300-600$ depending on number of slots, and stick the RAID controller in there. I would still be ahead on price, but more importantly have a more open system. For example, I could get a TB2 enclosure or whatever else comes down the pipe. An added bonus is that any single component is under $300 bucks and readily available.
Having said this, I am looking at comparable windows machines to the new Mac Pro, and for about 4K I think I could put something together with 64GB of RAM that will do nicely, have all the openness and upgradability I'd be looking for. For now, I think I am good with the old Mac Pro and the recent upgrades.
Having a robust primary/secondary data system was my number one priority and after a very painful lesson, and I think I am now covered in spaces.
BTW, also take a look at the various HighPoint and ATTO RAID cards available. Again, for more money you get additional flexibility and options, and of course, as any other component in this system, completely transportable to some other platform if the need arises
Cheers.
-
here is another site that specializes in this stuff and prices are quite good. Lots of different options for chassis and controllers.
http://www.pc-pitstop.com
A review by a guy that went the same route as I did. He did use far more expensive controller than I did, but at x8 PCIe, not sure you are going to see much of a difference in performance. He also went for a single tower housing for 8 drives, vs. the OWC 4 bay rack mount housings I went with. The OWC is cheaper, and you have the same 8 drive configuration on a single controller, with full hardware redundancy for each set of 4 drives. In a RAID 10 setup, this is about as robust as it gets. Of course, you still need backups :)
Part 1 - http://www.pauljoy.com/2012/07/mac-pro-thunderbolt-dilemma/
Part 2 - http://www.pauljoy.com/2012/08/mac-pro-raid-setup/
-
Thanks.
Cheers,
Bernard