|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: CRU vs. FTP ingest on Doremi
|
|
|
Carsten Kurz
Film God
Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009
|
posted 04-30-2018 06:06 AM
Depends on the scenario,
USB is usually the slowest method. However, recently ShowVaults come with a new 'X10' revision Mainboard that offers a USB3.0 connection. If you have such a recent ShowVault, your USB ingest speed may be on par with CRU or FTP.
You probably already experienced that ingest is extremely slow when the server is currently playing.
Regarding FTP - you don't get features on FTP-capable ingest media, so, if you ingest something though FTP, it will most likely have been copied to a network drive, NAS, another server, etc. That copy process takes time as well, so, even if FTP ingest as such would be faster, depending on the situation, you would need to factor in the preceeding copy operation. If you use multiple ShowVault servers, a mixed method is often used, CRU-ingest on one server, then FTP from there to the other servers.
- Carsten
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Macaulay
Film God
Posts: 2321
From: Toronto, Canada
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-30-2018 06:07 AM
I don't have exact speeds for these ingest options, and rated speed of any link is never realized in actual data transfer speed - there must be a lot of extra data being transferred for error correction etc.
Slowest is USB, since the server probably only does USB2 (USB3 is pretty fast on servers that have USB3 ports like an ICMP, and Showvaults made in the last year or so do have USB3 BUT you need a CRU bay with USB3 - a blue jack).
My usual guess is that a feature will ingest with USB2 in roughly its playing time, it can be less or more of course - 3D and 4K take longer. Most external CRU bays can use either USB or SATA but one must add an external SATA port to the server to use that.
Using SATA or USB3 on an external bay, or the internal SATA CRU bay on the 4U ShowVault, is a bunch faster: a feature should ingest in about 1/4 to 1/3 of its playing time.
FTP over a 1000bT network is about the same speed. Over 100bT ... take a long lunch. And speed does depend on the source, a slow computer won't manage the maximum 1000bT data rate.
Also, as you undoubtedly know, a Doremi DCP or SV server doing playback will be very slow ingesting.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 04-30-2018 07:43 AM
quote: Carsten Kurz
Regarding FTP - you don't get features on FTP-capable ingest media, so, if you ingest something though FTP, it will most likely have been copied to a network drive, NAS, another server, etc. That copy process takes time as well, so, even if FTP ingest as such would be faster, depending on the situation, you would need to factor in the preceeding copy operation.
Usually, but not always.
At my last theater job I handled festival ingests using a custom-built CentOS PC with both a USB3 card and a built-in CRU bay. I would ingest into either of the two screen servers (one was a Barco Alchemy, the other a DSS200) by FTP-ing directly from the connected CRU drive or USB device (flash stick or USB bus-powered hard drive) into them, via gigabit ethernet. I used Filezilla for this, and it worked well. I would typically achieve 100-120mbps from the SATA2/CRU and 70-90 from USB3. Obviously, USB2 was a lot slower - usually around 25-35. I found that this was a good way to take advantage of the USB3 speed gain to ingest into a screen server that does not have a USB3 jack.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Biraj Thakuri
Film Handler
Posts: 11
From: Nepal, Pokhara 11
Registered: Sep 2017
|
posted 04-30-2018 08:13 AM
quote: Carsten Kurz
You probably already experienced that ingest is extremely slow when the server is currently playing.
Regarding FTP - you don't get features on FTP-capable ingest media, so, if you ingest something though FTP, it will most likely have been copied to a network drive, NAS, another server, etc. That copy process takes time as well
Yes I have an older model showvault with usb 2.0
Yes the usb 2.0 is very slow. Takes 1 hr to ingest 80GB feature.
I had given the FTP a thought because we have a gigabit switch and it would make sense to copy feature to PC one time and then network ingest in two servers. I manage two screens.
quote: Dave Macaulay
FTP over a 1000bT network is about the same speed. Over 100bT ... take a long lunch. And speed does depend on the source, a slow computer won't manage the maximum 1000bT data rate.
Also, as you undoubtedly know, a Doremi DCP or SV server doing playback will be very slow ingesting.
Thanks for the info Dave. Yes the speed does take a hit if ingest is done during a playback. We usually get features on CRU drive but in some cases they send portable drive which are unbearably slow. That's why I wanted to setup a PC server to copy at both screens at same time. What would be the speed if I ingest from server to server by ftp? also what PC specs are good for such type of transfers.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carsten Kurz
Film God
Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009
|
posted 04-30-2018 09:33 AM
You should be able to achieve half realtime/playtime ingests durations through FTP.
If you use two servers, it certainly is not a bad idea to create a simple file server where you can copy ingest media to, and ingest from there. It doesn't need to be a high-end PC or server. Get a simple tower with some space for at least 3-4 3.5" drive slots.
network port/card should be Gigabit capable, but all current mainboards should offer that. You could use a cheap second hand PC, provided that they offer enough SATA ports/drive bays. And yes, even if your greatest ingest handicap are USB2.0 drives, that PC should offer a USB3.0 port. As many portable drives nowadays are in fact USB3.0, but will still only offer USB2.0 speed on the Doremis.
A simple USB2.0 copy to a local drive will be much faster than a USB ingest on a Doremi. You could also try to mount a CRU-frame into that PC, however, the benefit is small, as, once you ingested content from CRU onto one of your Doremis at decent speed, you can ingest it to the second Doremi at similar speeds. I guess USB2.0 is your main issue.
Every copy carries the risc of file corruption, though, so, if possible, you should use a dedicated file copy/sync application that will also explicitly verify the local copy against the source media.
- Carsten
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic