Thanks for the post, fcw. Very interesting.

I mentioned the RAID 1 as "one" part of the puzzle. Having a RAID 1 doesn't prevent from having a "real" backup, since if, by mistake, you delete your files, they're deleted on both drives. So, the backup is there to make sure that even if you *do* make a mistake, there will be a backup from "not too long ago" somewhere.

As you said, RAID 1 is cool only in terms of disk reliability, since the possibilities of two disks failing at the same moment is extremely low. The good thing is that if one disk fails, not only will the current data still be there, but the system is also up and running, so you don't even have to worry about it! That's what I call peace of mind.

Timkiel, what part of France are you from?

Jerome

Tinkiel, which model do you have that supports all those machines?

Last time I looked they weren't up to protecting a single 9600 with two drives in it. I guess that's been a while, though... [:)]

Jerome...five outages in nine months?! That's really weird. I've never lived in the Palisades, but I've lived in the area since 1962 - in West LA, Santa Monica, Mar Vista, Culver City, and Sherman Oaks - and it's never been anywhere near that frequent.

fcw, i'm very thankful for your post - this are very valid points. unfortunately actually in europe we encounter an increasing frequency of brownouts, even larger international outages because energy companies are economizing like blazes and this is nothing computers like ...
and you can bet you have just not saved your work in the moment it happens.

we have lately integrated 2 2,5 kVA UPS (corresponding to this model ) and it provides power for more than 20 minutes for a server with a raid, 2 workstations with monitors and several audio- and switching devices.

if an UPS doesn't *pull* a single workstation any more you might want to consider changing the batteries - they don't survive longer than 3 years usually ....
christian

Jerome - near Carcasonne in the southwest.

Nick - I have an APC Smart UPS 1000 1U Rack. Doesn't last very long when the power goes off (about 5 minutes). But it does the job and wasn't overly expensive plus I only had 1U of rack space left - otherwise I might have considered the 1500 or 2200 versions

Cheers

Tim

@Another User said:

if an UPS doesn't *pull* a single workstation any more you might want to consider changing the batteries - they don't survive longer than 3 years usually ....

We've been using the same little 1,500 VA APC unit for eight years now; in that time, we have replaced the battery once. The unit tests itself every few days by deliberately switching to the battery while the mains is up to see if it can take the load, and reports when the battery is becoming too weak to be dependable.

By the way, in case anyone reading this doesn't know, never put laser printers on a UPS; they can have stupendous surges of current consumption that can exceed the output supply limits, which can result in everything on the UPS losing power even when the mains is available.

Thanks Tinkiel.

I actually have my tail between my legs. Yesterday evening we came home, and the first thing that happened when we walked in the door was that the power flickered. [:)]

My main computer was asleep and all the others were off, so the computer didn't even need restarting. But I guess that did make the point.

@Another User said:

You know, I never put monitors on a UPS ...

but it helps if dialog windows need to be answered before the machine is shuting down [;)] and LCDs don't eat too much ....
christian

@fcw said:

You know, I never put monitors on a UPS ...

but it helps if dialog windows need to be answered before the machine is shuting down [;)]

That tends not to be an issue with Linux and Unix servers; ours rarely even have keyboards attached to them, never mind screens.

And while I won't have Windows on any server that we depend on, I do still manage Windows servers for clients remotely via Remote Desktop, which works fine from my laptop, even though it's running Linux too. [:)]

hehe - the server is not the problem, you know, even windows servers can shutdown unattended [;)]
i was talking about audio workstations (mostly in recording mode) - if you cannot answer dialogs here you may loose a complete session ...
christian

@Another User said:

i was talking about audio workstations (mostly in recording mode) - if you cannot answer dialogs here you may loose a complete session ...
christian

Fair enough; I have my DAW set up to save backups every few minutes, and that seems to work okay without being too annoying.

The other (non-DAW) workstations here run pretty much entirely off the network, so hitting them with an axe wouldn't lose much work. Not that that happens too much.

Hi Guys,

If I may, I'd like to jump away from the power issues for a minute…

I'm just starting on this Mini-Farm journey, and have one Intel Mini 1.83 Core Duo hooked up on the network. It's got VI player installed, and I'm using Bidule to host. Currently without an audio or MIDI solution for getting it talking to Logic on my G5, but that's coming soon (with suggestions from you guys, hopefully). At the minute, I haven't installed any instruments to the mini, and am accessing them over the network (they're on an external drive, connected to the G5). This leads me to my main question:

Does anyone use a Network Hard Disk for VSL?
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to hook up a 2TB LaCie to my Gigabit switch, and access it from all the (eventual) machines.

What would be the main issues here?

Or am I still better off swapping out the internal 5400RPM Mini drive with a 7200?
I want to stay clear of FireWire, as I may be using the ProFire ADAT.

I feel like such a newbie again. it sucks.

Peter

Hi Peter:

my advice is for you to switch the internal drive to a 7200RPM. It's really not hard (and at the same time you could upgrade your mini to 2GB... [:)]).

I don't think using a network hard drive storage is a good idea within this setup. Definitely not as fast as having the samples on your main drive.

Plus, the less traffic on the network the better, especially if you are using MIDIOverLan.

jerome

Jerome, what is this based on? My understanding from Jesse White, who sets up these kinds of rigs for lots of composers (on PCs, not Macs) and wrote an article about it in our magazine, is that gigabit ethernet is easily capable of streaming samples all over kingdom come...while simultaneously running FX-Teleport and MIDI. He uses a server machine with RAID, but that's obviously not for bandwidth.

Have you tried gigabit ethernet and found it not to work? Otherwise, frankly, I'd be more inclined to go with Jesse's advice, since he's done it many times.

And without wanting to sound aggressively argumentative, I also have to ask why it's necessary to install a faster internal drive instead of just using a FW drive for samples. That's what I'd do, even if I were streaming eight outputs through a FW interface.

Again, I apologize if I sound like a weenie - that's not my intention; I just want to hear your reasoning.

I know that Jerome has set a few composers up as well. A local drive would always be more reliable than a network drive, right? In a setup with e.g. 10 Mac Minis, you'll probably have one doing Violins, another doing Oboe, etc. Since they're seperated that way anyway, why not use local drives. One less PC/server, one less thing to worry about.

I still think a Mac Mini is a silly choice for VI slaves. I guess if you're scared to death of Windows it's the best way to go. But 98% of the population uses Windows, so there must be a way to make it work... [8-)] Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Mac fan, but the PC slave you can build for ~$700 blows the Mac Mini out of the water.

Well, the reason for using a server is that all your machines can access it and you only have to install everything once; plus if one machine goes down, you just reach for the next one (and hopefullly you back up your server [:)] ). I don't have one set up, but the idea does make a lot of sense. By the way, my network has never failed, in fact I've never heard of that happening, so I'm not worried about going over it instead of directly to the SATA bus.

As to Windows machines, I have two of them (plus a third that's not working) and it's not like I'm afraid of them - in fact I like them - but they can be a nightmare when something goes wrong. I mean, if you start up from a system CD, Windows wants to replace your whole system drive, programs and all! So for me the idea of my Windows machines being Macs when I need to troubleshoot them is very appealing.

On the other hand I've posted several times that I don't think Mac Minis are a good choice for sample-streaming machines unless you have an extra FireWire interface sitting around. They have no slots and only hold 2GB of RAM, and the built-in digital interface's two outs isn't enough. Plus you can only clock them through TOSlink, which is not an audiophile way of doing things (lightpipes are jittery). So I agree - although I think Mac Pros would make excellent Windows machines; if you need that kind of power, you can't put together the same thing for the price if you buy the equivalent components on the internet. I checked a few months ago.

Just out of interest, what $700 machine would you put together? Motherboard, processor, etc.

may i join your discussion ... IMO there are more *if's* than clear directives ...
mac-mini vs. cheap PC with 2 GB RAM: id say the mac mini can load 50% more samples, the PC is more flexible regarding soundcard and drives ...
network vs. local drive: much depends on the quality of the gibabit switch and how good the server (resp. the storage of the server) allows concurrent file requests - to simply access another host holding data via network would be not the best idea.
firewire-drives: it has turned up drives and audiodevices commonly on firewire are sometimes troublesome, often firewire drives have no sufficient cooling and are dying early when used for sample streaming.

if all involved components are reliable and selected carefully each of the setups above would work of course.
christian

Thanks cm.

How would you set up the server so it does handle concurrent requests? Jesse recommends one of the Windows Server versions (I forget which one - will have to refer to his article in VI [:)] ) - i.e. it's not just another computer sharing its hard drives.

nick, the server is not the point (if windows then 2003 standard would be just fine) - the storage would be more important. this could be a software raid of sATA-disks up to external fibre-devices ... if it's some kind of hardware-raid make sure it supports grab-through (does not cache the whole file from which only a few bytes are requested ) and NCQ (re-ordering of block-requests) ... to select components and configure this is a job for experts who are then also responsible for the performance and goes far beyond the scope of this forum.
christian

Hey Jerome, I just put in the "Friendchip DMX 16" with 2 MOP4s and 2 MQAs....I am a bit confused on how I'm configuring it and what not. Here's my set-up: G5 Dual 2 Gig 6 MAc Minis Motu 2408 with Digital Performer Not sure what to clock to....PCI ADAT? Internal? SPDIF? I know you guys are using it successfully, so I thought I'd go straight to the source. Thanks in advance for your help

@Nick Batzdorf said:

I also have to ask why it's necessary to install a faster internal drive instead of just using a FW drive for samples. That's what I'd do, even if I were streaming eight outputs through a FW interface.

Nick, I wasn't able to make this work on my mini. The combination of audio and disk streaming using FW (Profire Lightbridge) was an unhappy marriage. Hence I started streaming off my internal 5400 drive and haven't had any problems. Since I'm only hosting brass it's not a very intensive demand on resources so maybe mine isn't an ideal test case. If anyone IS using FW for both audio and streaming with the mini I would sure like to hear about it.