And if you end up with a RAID 0, don't put anything important on it, use
it only for media (which can always be recaptured).




Which will work right up until the point where we all switch to a tapeless workflow. Then you'll need 2 separate RAID arrays - a fast one for editing and a redundant one for archiving.

Nah. RAID 3 is still the best option. Fast and redundant.

From what I've read, RAID 5 is faster still and has better redundancy. The byte-level parity overhead is what kills RAID 3's performance.

RAID 10 combines the fast performance of RAID 0, and the redundancy of RAID 1. You need double the number of drives, but as we are fond of saying these days, hard drive space is cheap.

RAID 5 is superior in a server environment, with many hundreds or thousands of hits per second. What you're reading was probably geared towards that. But for large contiguous files, RAID 3 can't be beat. And the benchmarks confirm this.

The redundancy safety is the same between them. The main difference here is that RAID 3 can rebuild with little or no performance hit, while RAID 5 takes a serious hit during rebuild.

Even compared to RAID 10, RAID 3 is equal or better.

Wow...you guys are great! Would you guys share what type of editing rig you use for editing?

Thanks, Jim. That helps a lot.

Looks like RAID 3 may indeed be the ticket for tapeless HD workflows - speed and redundancy for capture and editing. With single-drive backups for long-term storage of source media, projects and finished programs.

I just bought a gateway 64 bit computer with triple core processor. I am worried that my video production ste 1.5 won't load up on it. I have vista home premium. is there an update or something I can get from adobe to make it work?

is there an update or something I can get from adobe to make it work?




Yeah, it's called CS4. Should be out in a couple of weeks or so. It's not quite a free update, though.

Well guys, this is the rig I am thinking about buying... I welcome any and all comments... Is this configuration more than is needed? Is it too little? wrong OS? (i can get it with either Vista or XP) Its not three separate drives, but a RAID (1) array for system drive, applications and scrathc disks and a RAID(0) for the video files. I picked the low end video card...right choice? 4GB enough RAM?

Here are the details. Its an Alienware Desktop:

Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Q9550 2.83GHz 12MB Cache 1333MHz FSB

Alienware® High-Performance Liquid Cooling

Alienware® 1000 Watt Multi-GPU Approved Power Supply

Single 512MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 9600 GT – Superclocked

4GB† Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1066MHz - 2 x 2048MB

Windows Vista® Home Premium with Service Pack 1 – DirectX 10 Ready!

SYSTEM Drive - 500GB (2 x 500GB) SATA 3Gb/s 7,200RPM 2 x 16MB Cache RAID (1)

VIDEO FILES - 2TB (2 x 1TB) SATA 3Gb/s 7,200RPM w/ 2 x 32MB Cache RAID (0)

Optical Dr 1: 20X Dual Layer Burner (DVD±RW)

Optical Dr 1: Dual Layer Blu-ray Reader (BD-ROM, DVD±RW, CD-RW)

Thanks in advance for your patience with me throughout this process! Your input has really been extremely helpful.
Jay

Processor is nice.

Liquid cooling is unnecessary, especially on that processor. Dump it if that lowers the price.

1000 watt PS is also overkill for that processor. Step it back to 600 W if you can, especially if it lowers the price.

Don't really need a superclocked GPU, step that back also if it makes things cheaper.

Memory is fine.

Stick with XP Pro with SP3 if you can. You won't need DX10 for editing.

Break out both RAIDs into separate drives. You won't need them in a RAID, but can make much better use of them as four separate drives.

Find out exactly what model of DVD and Blu-ray burner is included. It matters.