Best RAID Recommendation for Video Editing

[Cywok]

Looking for some recommendations on best RAID configuration based on the following requirements:

Hardware:
TVS-671-i3-4G
6 x 6T WD Red HDs
LAN-10G2T-D 2
Firmware 4.3.3
For backup purposes I have a Synology DS414 4 x 4T
I have a 10G LAN direct connection from PC to NAS (10.xxx) as well as a 1G connection (192.xxx) from NAS to router (for connection to rest of LAN network)

Primary NAS uses (home use)
Backup of PC
Media Streaming
Video Editing

I want to use an iSCSI connection over the 10G network to perform video editing from the PC. As such, sequential read/write performance is of the highest priority. Basically want to use the NAS like a DAS for the video editing purposes.

Alternatives that I am considering:

Option 1
- Create 2 storage pools
- Pool 1 = 2 x6T RAID0 for video editing (with backup to Synology)
- Pool 2 = 4 x 6T RAID5 for everything else

Option 2
- Create one storage pool
- Having done lots of research, it is still not clear whether RAID5, RAID6 or RAID10 is the best choice here
- My first inclination was RAID10 based on the theoretical 3x write improvements but based on this article it seems that RAID10 is the worst choice, at least for write performance. RAID5 looks to have the best write performance but not sure I want to risk such a large array on single disk redundancy, even with backups. How reliable is that article?

I do have a handle on the different size factors, rebuild times, etc for the various RAID configurations but not sure on the performance parameters.

Thoughts?

[dolbyman]

how about a qtier or caching choice ..

if the tiers or cache is large enough, all your current files would be in the "fast" area and if you choose very fast SSD's for that, they should saturate your 10GbE connection even without a RAID

[Cywok]

For the cache option, I know that I have to give up 2 HD slots to enable the cache which provides read/write performance. That cache has to be configured as RAID1.
You can use one HD slot for cache but that only provides read acceleration.
That means I have to give up 2 x 6T of storage space for the cache.
I understood that SSD cache really only affects random read/write operations but most video editing is sequential in nature so not sure whether a cache will help.

I know nothing of qtier.
How many HD slots have to be given up for the qtier and assuming more that 1 slot, then what RAID configuration can be used?
I see the same limitation of giving up 2 x 6T of storage space as well.
Not sure of the algorithm which decides which files reside in the "fast" qtier as well. I would hope that the video editing files would rise to that tier but not sure.

It would be nice to know if anyone else has actual experience on whether any speed gains are achieved.

[storageman]

Unlike SSD cache, tiering benefits both random and sequential IO but you need min 3-4TB in SSD tier to make it worth doing.
Probably 671 too small for tieiring,
If you're using ISCSI host speed is just as important as NAS speed, especially for read performance.
Reds aren't great for performance Red Pro or Ironwolf Pro better.

[Trexx]

Here are some recommendations from Bob Zelin who is the "video guru" on the board from another post (with slight edits for clarity to this thread).

With video editing, your main concern is performance of the RAID array, so you are best off with a single static volume. I also do not trust RAID 5, and I always configure RAID 6 to allow a second drive to fail, in case of failure during a RAID 5 rebuild. I personally have not seen any benefit from the SSD Caching with large video files. It may be great for very fast access to lots of tiny files, but when you are dealing with enormous HD, and 4K Media, I personally have not see the performance increase because of the SSD Cache."

He also goes on to say...

As long as you have a 10G network setup (your 10G port on your NAS connected to a 10G switch, like a Netgear), you will be able to edit with Premiere, Resolve, FCP-X, and Media Composer without issue.

[Bob Zelin]

#1 - Dolbyman, Storageman and Trexx all know more than I do
#2 - you are WAY over thinking this, and your setup is way to complicated. Do you want to edit video, or do you want to be "Mr. Computer" and setup a super complicated system ?
Forget the TVS-671.
Get a nice boring TVS-871T, or spend $100 more and get the modern TVS-1282T. That's right - EIGHT SATA drives, all setup in a single static volume. NO iSCSI. Stop it with the iSCSI.
You don't need it. The 871T and 1282T come with two FREE build in 10Gbase-T ports - fast enough to do 4K and 6K editing.
You are NOT going to create a storage pool. You are going to create ONE STATIC VOLUME RAID 5 or RAID 6 to get maximum bandwidth and performance. Use good drives like HGST NAS drives or
WD RED drives.
the 10G card you mention is no longer sold. The current card is the QNAP LAN-10G2T-X550, but YOU DONT NEED IT, since the two models I mentioned come FOR FREE with the two 10Gbase-T ports.
Forget RAID 10 - use RAID 5 or RAID 6 in a single static volume.
Don't worry about your rebuild times - you are going to buy good drives from HGST or WD (no Seagate drives !!!) - and you will have wonderful reliability. And if you create a RAID, and you do have a failure,
you will let your editor work until end of day, pop in the replacement drive, and your rebuild will easily be done by the next morning, with no errors, and no failure.

I urge you to setup TWO separate networks - one for your house internet, and one for your shared storage system on 10G Ethernet. A Netgear JGS524 is a 24 port $99 switch, which is wonderful for house network.
If you have multiple 10G clients, get a Netgear XS708T or Netgear XS716T for your 10G switch, and run the 10G port on the QNAP into this switch, and you will get wonderful performance. On your Mac's or PC's, you
will get 100 MB/sec - 110 MB/sec on a 1G connection, and if you add a thunderbolt to 10G adaptor (for Apple iMac, Mac Pro, etc.) you will get over 600 MB/sec read and write - (you need 143 MB/sec to do 6K).
You can get these thunderbolt to 10G adaptors from Promise (SanLink2) or Sonnet (Twin 10G). ATTO also makes them. I am not a fan of the buss powered Akitio thunderbolt to 10G adaptor (long story).
For your PC's, you can use a generic Intel X540 or Intel X550 -T1 or T2 card, that will plug either into the Netgear 10G switch or directly into the QNAP 10G port (make sure you have a static IP assigned, no DHCP) and you
will get over 600 Mb/sec read/write on your PC - enough to do 4K and 6K.
Your editing applications (that I have tested over and over and over again) can be FCP X, Adobe Premier, and Davinci Resolve. If you want to run AVID Media Composer, get Indiestor Mimiq, which will emulate AVID ISIS Bin Locking.
I do this every day, and I install QNAPs' every day for video editing applications.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Bob Zelin

[Cywok]

Thanks Bob. There are a couple of points that may not have been clear from my initial post.

All the hardware mentioned is already purchased and non-returnable. I am trying to maximize performance on that configuration. Future upgrades of NAS and/or HDs are far in the future, although I do appreciate the different recommendations provided by yourself and Storageman.
I use windows 10 machines at this time along with Premiere Pro CC 2017.
I already have 2 networks in place. One is a 1G network through a router which connects all my devices including the NAS(s). That runs on 192.xxx subnet.
The second network (10.xxx subnet) is my 10G network. It is a direct connect cable from PC to QNAP NAS between the 10G network adapters.
Static IPs are used on all the NAS(s).

all setup in a single static volume.

I have been using a single thick volume. Any idea on the performance hit of a thick volume vs single static volume?
The reason I chose thick volume was to enable snapshots which were only used on that part of the NAS dedicated to PC file backup. They were to be a safety net in case I inadvertently deleted files and/or my PC files were ever hit by a ransomware attack. Snapshots consume far less storage space than having multiple backup copies of my files on another backup device. Having said that, I have never come across an occasion to use snapshots so losing them is not a big deal if I get better read/write performance.

NO iSCSI. Stop it with the iSCSI.

The reason for iSCSI was twofold
- I was previously using an older version of Premiere Pro which did not work with mapped network drives. iSCSI was the only means to circumvent that issue. I believe the Premiere Pro CC 2017 version can use mapped network drives so that negates the need for iSCSI
- somewhere I had read that iSCSI gave better performance than mapped network drives using SAMBA
So does iSCSI give poorer performance that mapped network drives or is it that a single static volume just provides better performance?

Don't worry about your rebuild times

I normally do not but my rebuild times and/or initial volume build times using RAID5 on both the QNAP and Synology for 4 HD configuration typically run in the 18+ hr range. That is using WD NAS Red drives
Not a big deal but I wish I could get overnight rebuilds.

Forget RAID 10 - use RAID 5 or RAID 6 in a single static volume.

For my particular hardware configuration is there any performance differences between RAID5 or RAID6?
It sounds like RAID5 will give the best performance but at the greatest redundancy risk.

Thanks for all your help.

[Trexx]

Thanks Bob. There are a couple of points that may not have been clear from my initial post.

all setup in a single static volume.

I have been using a single thick volume. Any idea on the performance hit of a thick volume vs single static volume?
The reason I chose thick volume was to enable snapshots which were only used on that part of the NAS dedicated to PC file backup. They were to be a safety net in case I inadvertently deleted files and/or my PC files were ever hit by a ransomware attack. Snapshots consume far less storage space than having multiple backup copies of my files on another backup device. Having said that, I have never come across an occasion to use snapshots so losing them is not a big deal if I get better read/write performance.

I will try and jump in here some and Bob can clarify/fix whatever I butcher

When you are going through a static single volume, you are laying out the file system/structure once and that is it. My assumption is also that you have the least amount of "system overhead" involved from a kernel/driver standpoint. Simpler = less stuff in the I/O path.

When you leverage storage pools and especially snapshots, you are now adding overhead from an abstraction layer (storage pools/volumes) as well as overhead from block change tracking (snapshots). The way snapshots basically work is when you create a snapshot, it take a metadata picture your volume (that is why if you had say a 100TB volume, taking a snapshot doesn't cost you ANOTHER 100TB's of space). Once you have taken that snapshot, ANY changes made to the volume (add/delete/change data/etc.) are tracked/captured. So if you have a 5 block file, and you make a change in block 3. Snapshot makes a copy of the ORIGINAL contents of block 3 (in the snapshot reserved space) and then writes the "NEW" block 3 on disk. That way if you need to roll back, it copies that original block 3 back to over the "current" version. The higher the amount of changes made, and the longer time that has passed since your original "snapshot" the more data blocks that will have been tracked.

Even if you aren't using Snapshots on say your "VIDEO" section of the NAS, this is still overhead to the NAS itself as it has to determine if that applies or not for this volume, as well as overhead if you have users access both the PC file area at the same time as the "Video" section.

Don't worry about your rebuild times

I normally do not but my rebuild times and/or initial volume build times using RAID5 on both the QNAP and Synology for 4 HD configuration typically run in the 18+ hr range. That is using WD NAS Red drives
Not a big deal but I wish I could get overnight rebuilds.

This will be impacted by many things. For one, using 7200RPM drives such as Red Pro's, HGST Deskstar NAS, etc. will perform a little better than the WD Red drives. CPU will have some impact in terms of the RAID-5/6 parity calculation speed. Amount of additional processes running at that time will also have a big impact. If you have say PC backups to NAS running, NAS backups to external drives, Surv. Station camera's recording, SMART scans, etc. Anything access the drive during the rebuild will impact the time.

Forget RAID 10 - use RAID 5 or RAID 6 in a single static volume.

For my particular hardware configuration is there any performance differences between RAID5 or RAID6?
It sounds like RAID5 will give the best performance but at the greatest redundancy risk.

The typical train of thought is the more drives you have (or if they are large capacity 6+ TB) then you should lean toward RAID-6. Larger # of drives = more chances for another drive to fail during a Raid-5 rebuild. Larger capacity drives = LONGER Raid-5 rebuild ... ie. longer time that all the other drives are under "stress" during rebuild and again more chance for failure.

[Bob Zelin]

As always, everything Trexx posts is accurate
iSCSI was used in the stone age by companies like Studio Network Solutions to isolate a volume and control read and write access. At one time, this was important for certain software (AVID) and gave you better speeds.
This is 2017. You don't need iSCSI. The performance across a 10G standard IPv4 network is AMAZING today, with super fast speeds. Adobe Premiere (both CS6 and CC2017), FCP X, FCP 7, and Davinci Resolve (as well as Adobe After Effects and Adobe Photoshop) can all use Network volumes without issue today. Today, if you want to run AVID Media Composer, you simply install Indiestor Mimiq, and this emulates the file structure that AVID wants to see for Media Composer.
RAID 5 allow for one drive to fail, RAID 6 allows for 2 drives to fail without losing your data. If you have a 6 bay array, you certainly do not want to dedicate the equivalent of TWO of these drives for redundancy in case of failure - you will have no storage space left. So with a 6 bay, I would go with RAID 5. The more drives, the faster the system will run. So a QNAP TVS-EC1680U with 16 SATA drives will run faster than a TVS-1282T with only 8 drives. The less drives, the less the performance. I have never seen a 4 drive system work for video editing, when more than one person is accessing the media.
The simpler you make the system, the less problems you will have and the greater the performance you will have. I try to do as little as possible, to make these systems as bulletproof as possible. This applies not only to QNAP, but to
Synology, Thecus, Netgear ReadyNAS and everything else. I think back on the nightmare that Apple XSAN was with all the metadata server nonsense - it was always a night mare. Again, this is 2017 -if you have to administrate a network for video shared storage, then something is wrong. These systems today are simple and reliable. Once you set them up, they should just work without interference. You should never have to have an editor say to you "can you assign another 3TB iSCSI volume for me, because I am running out of room". Those days are over.

Bob Zelin

[Cywok]

Simpler = less stuff in the I/O path.

Totally agree. I was hoping though for some quantitative estimate of the improvement. Is it 1% or 10% for example.

ANY changes made to the volume (add/delete/change data/etc.) are tracked/captured

Is the tracking in real time or when the snapshot is performed? For example, I schedule snapshots to happen at 03:00 each night. My assumption is that during "regular" hours there would be no impacts on the NAS by using snapshots, however, if tracking is done real time, then there would be.

This will be impacted by many things.

Agreed. Times I provided are based on no other activities running on the NAS. I have even tried some of the suggestions in this article to try to improve rebuild times. They did improve the times but not significantly.

[Cywok]

I would go with RAID 5

Definitely starting to lean that way as well. The original article I linked to shows that RAID5 gives the best read/write performance of the different RAID options. I would have to tweak my backup strategies but very doable. Understand RAID5 is the least redundant RAID option but I can make a backup strategy that almost totally mitigates a RAID failure during rebuild.

You don't need iSCSI

I definitely feel your dislike for iSCSI but I am still on the fence on this one. Articles like this seem to indicate that iSCSI delivers superior performance.

I guess the only way to quantitatively prove it one way or the other is to test the the performance of each of the various configurations using something like CrystalDiskMark.
So test various configurations such as:
Static volume vs Thick
iSCSI vs SAMBA

The simpler you make the system, the less problems you will have and the greater the performance you will have.

Agree to an extent. Using iSCSI (if it proves to be a better performer) is not an overhead for me. I am the Administrator, Video Editor and manager of the NAS It is just a home system that I use.

[Trexx]

Simpler = less stuff in the I/O path.

Totally agree. I was hoping though for some quantitative estimate of the improvement. Is it 1% or 10% for example.

I don't think it can be quantified as it is going to be so dependent on configuration (workload, drive config, hw model, etc.).

ANY changes made to the volume (add/delete/change data/etc.) are tracked/captured

Is the tracking in real time or when the snapshot is performed? For example, I schedule snapshots to happen at 03:00 each night. My assumption is that during "regular" hours there would be no impacts on the NAS by using snapshots, however, if tracking is done real time, then there would be.

The tracking is real-time (copy on write). The Snapshots you set at night, are really just in a sense ROLL-BACK markers. So say you take a snapshot every week on Sunday. If you need to revert back, you can only revert data back to the exact state it was on a prior Sunday, but you couldn't revert back to the state say for Tuesday night as you have no snapshot for that time.

You can find more information out in this deck:
https://www.slideshare.net/QNAP_Inc/und ... -from-qnap

This will be impacted by many things.

Agreed. Times I provided are based on no other activities running on the NAS. I have even tried some of the suggestions in this article to try to improve rebuild times. They did improve the times but not significantly.

Enable/disable Bitmap can be done through the Storage Manager GUI.
The other item of real value is Tip#1, which in QNAP would be done via the following command:

Code: Select all

 
echo 50000 >/proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min

Other than bitmap, you would have to re-apply any other SSH commands you applied after every reboot of the NAS.

[aspomwell]

I normally do not but my rebuild times and/or initial volume build times using RAID5 on both the QNAP and Synology for 4 HD configuration typically run in the 18+ hr range. That is using WD NAS Red drives
Not a big deal but I wish I could get overnight rebuilds.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=10268

My RAID6 consisting of 5 6TB WD Reds was on pace to rebuild in about 50 hours until I went home and followed the instructions in the thread above. The final 80% of the build finished in about 8 hours instead of 40 (yes, you can make the change while the rebuild is in progress)...

Highly recommended.

[Trexx]

I normally do not but my rebuild times and/or initial volume build times using RAID5 on both the QNAP and Synology for 4 HD configuration typically run in the 18+ hr range. That is using WD NAS Red drives
Not a big deal but I wish I could get overnight rebuilds.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=10268

My RAID6 consisting of 5 6TB WD Reds was on pace to rebuild in about 50 hours until I went home and followed the instructions in the thread above. The final 80% of the build finished in about 8 hours instead of 40 (yes, you can make the change while the rebuild is in progress)...

Highly recommended.

You can pretty much ignore the rebuild time estimates in general. The 2nd half of the rebuild is almost always faster than the 1st half.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pasteurboo]

Hi, this seems to be the closest thread to my query. I'm wondering how long it should take to expand a pool on a TS563 8gb. I had 4 x 6tb WD red drives in raid5 and added another 6tb drive when the unit got to 82% capacity. The lights are blinking and I can hear the drives doing something but I am now at day 14. The Nas has also unmounted and I can't get it to re mount, this has happened about three times before and a reboot has fixed it, but I'm reluctant to reboot whilst the pool is expanding. I'm a photographer, so the 18tb of files is made up of about 400 000 x 40 mb jpegs. I came across an online calculator that suggested 10 days with 7200 rpm drives, so I assume 14 days is not unusual?