Re: [linux-audio-user] Submitted for your approval

Hi, --- "Jan \"Evil Twin\" Depner" <eviltwin69(a)cableone.net> wrote: These are an interesting set of opinions that I don't agree with. Well, I do agree when reguarding the original writers design requirements. I'm an advocate of scsi hardware raid but only for professional installations because IMO it's overkill and to expensive for individual work stations. Here's my "active" client count: stepdaddy bin # ls /home/studio/clients/ |wc -l 35 Here's the data amount for that client array: /dev/sdc1 109GB 79GB 25GB 76% /raid5 Everyone of those 35 clients pays my partners and I to produce their music. There's probably an average of eight songs in each of those 35 client directories and an average of 16 audio tracks per song. I'd guess that each keeper track takes about an hour to produce. There are to many examples of musicians that have their personal best performance which they'll have a difficult time reproducing. My standard for data management is that under no circumstances can I ever lose any data. The scsi hardware raid gives us hardware redundancy with raid 5. We run three production rooms that symoultaneously share the client array. Two of the rooms are fairly low bandwidth; mastering--stereo images, preproduction--midi and sequencing. The third room is doing multiple mono audio channel printing and mixing. The multiple mono mixing done with the Macs is via 100mb LAN. Otherwise most work in that room is via lightpipe. In addition to audio production bandwidth usage we run rsync over LAN and we're adding video production. I know how more than a few studios conduct their affairs. One example is a friend who during the last year lost the production of an entire album and within a month of that incident lost a 120gig drive that was full of personal artwork and songs. The guy is a prolific pianist and song writer. All songs gone! Studios that manage their affairs this way will never do any important work for me. I'm not saying that my way of doing things is the only way and everyone else is wrong. If I required a personal workstation, I'd wholeheartidly follow the consensus of this thread. But my circumstances require that I look at 35 sets of artists and think about the quality of their performances not whether or not I can find their data, will the equipment perform and if I screw up then two business partners are gonna have to find jobs while we repay the debts to our clients. I'm not sure how I'd manage the volume of production that we do within any 24 hour period without hardware scsi raid. And I don't care because anything else would be penny wise but dollar foolish. I also don't know anything about latency with raid. Perhaps it applies only to kernel controled software raid. Ardour includes a local/native raid 0 implementation that shouldn't experience any computational latency. Anyway I'm filing my disagreement with at least two people who's opinions I absolutely respect...I, I, I, gotta duck and cringe. :) Guys, with my requirements, could it be done better and for less money? It's not like I enjoy looking at a four unit rack that cost me around $3,000.00 USD for HDDs and power. When looked at from a cost perspective, it irratates the hell out me. ron http://www6.tomshardware.com/storage/20030402/250_gb-04.html#data_transfer_… __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com