DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   High Definition Video Editing Solutions (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/high-definition-video-editing-solutions/)
-   -   To RAID or not to RAID? (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/high-definition-video-editing-solutions/236759-raid-not-raid.html)

Peter Moretti October 1st, 2009 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tripp Woelfel (Post 1408728)
...

To go to the OP's issue of the capture stopping prematurely, a RAID may or may not subvert the problem but it will not resolve his underlying system problem because any contemporary machine should be able to capture DV or HDV without a RAID. Thinking a RAID would resolve the problem is like thinking a poultice will fix a broken leg.

But Tripp, he's not capturing DV or HDV, he's trying to capture component video and encode it with the mjpeg codec. I have no idea what drive speed he needs for that. But he says:

"I tested my drive speed and, though it's fast enough according to the Intensity Pro specs, it just barely bests the required speed."

There is a chance that RAID will solve his problem.

Harm Millaard October 1st, 2009 04:53 AM

In addition to the valid remarks made by Peter, keep in mind that component video takes more space than HDV or AVCHD, so the fill rate on your disk will go up rapidly and your performance will go down.

Damian Heffernan October 1st, 2009 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harm Millaard (Post 1404371)
Tripp,

Safety is a major advantage that outweighs IMO the trouble of setting up a raid. If you use single disks any of them can fail and occasionally do. That means you just lost all your data on that disk. If you have a raid, a disk can also fail, but after replacing the disk with a new one, you have not lost your data, it will be reconstructed in the background.

Had one of my 7200rpm Western Digitals fail last month. Got a warranty replacement and thanks to the raid didn't lose a thing.

Shaun Roemich October 2nd, 2009 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harm Millaard (Post 1421501)
In addition to the valid remarks made by Peter, keep in mind that component video takes more space than HDV or AVCHD, so the fill rate on your disk will go up rapidly and your performance will go down.

What Harm says is by no means incorrect but a clarification here may help:
Component is how the video is coming into the system but has no bearing on how much storage is actually being used. That is a factor of ONE thing - the bitrate of the codec being used, in this case MJPEG, which we can assume to be reasonably high, ESPECIALLY when compared to AVCHD or HDV.

In practice, it's normally one of two things that make a system "fail" to capture:
- Either the hard drive speeds aren't high enough for the BITRATE of the codec writing to them or;
- The processor speed isn't high enough to keep up with real time transcoding of the data (whether analog or digital) coming in to the codec of choice. For a while, you can get away with not quite real time encoding in some systems as you will probably buffer to memory (or swap disk) but at some point if data is coming in faster than it can be transcoded, your capture will fail when you run out of buffer.

AVCHD, HDV and other long GOP MPEG formats require far more processor speed to transcode than they need hard drive speed to "keep up".

Harm Millaard October 2nd, 2009 08:26 AM

I have interpreted component as SDI or HD-SDI which is a bit more intensive from a data stream point of view.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:16 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network