Okay I'm in a remedial brain mode doing international QC Monkey fixes of an excruciating level of unnecessary BS arguing over .1db on audio peaks etc... So forgive my bonehead lack of Unity chops. My understanding of Unity's was that the only form of protection is mirroring which means half the storage. Did medianet improve upon protection for media? I see they have a couple spare drives in each chassis, at least they have tape label suggesting they are spares. We only mirror the project workspaces and not the media. Does this mean that if one drive goes bad in any of the 4 chassis all the media data is lost? I'm pretty sure they've had to replace drives in the past but I'm remembering back in early Unity that there was no raid protection other than mirroring. I can't believe we haven't lost it all at some point. I'm sure I'm missing a basic element of Unity MediaNet and how it protects media.
---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <domqsilverio@...> wrote :
Multiply that by how many clients you have and any other push/pull clients (ProTools, After Effects, etc.) and you have a decent idea how much bandwidth you need.
Since each chassis can do 340MB/s, that means one allocation group consisting of 1 chassis would provide about 10 clients of 10:1 9-way multicam.
So if you have 5 chassis, it means you have an aggregate bandwidth of 340 x 5 = 1700. But in 5 distinct pools of 340MB/s. If it was ONE big allocation group then it would be a single 1700 MB/s pool of bandwidth.
Unless you are doing high-res (DNX145 or 1:1 SD) separate allocation group per chassis is the way to go.
HTH
On 5/27/2014 6:06 PM, bigfish@... [Avid-L2] wrote:
We are very multicam/multigroup heavy with 9 plus cameras in a multigroup. Efx are minimal for most episodes. In light of that would I be correct to multiply 3.1 Mb/s by 9 cameras and let's just round it to ten so each edit bay would be pulling 31Mb/s? Or is it a smaller multiple because only one image from a multi group is playing and updating at a time. I don't spend much time in a multicam sequence as I'm onlining so I don't know if all the images in the 9 up display play in real time. I think they do, can someone confirm?
Given the heavy use of multigroup clips would that make it more advantageous to go with a single allocation group for the sake of bandwidth?
Posted by: bigfish@pacbell.net
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (8) |
No comments:
Post a Comment