So I have about 700GB of footage I need to somehow archive. I was thinking of uploading it onto Google drive with a 1TB storage plan for $10 a month but saw the office 365 thing that provides 1TB storage sometime next month for $1.60 per month but only works for 4 years and I have no idea what happens to it after then, perhaps I can renew it over and over again. Alternatively I could just go buy a 2TB hard drive (maybe portable), copy it onto it and put it somewhere safe.
I don't see myself trying out or investing in tape storage and my collection of footage will continuously increase. I could set up a nas some time in the future tho.
Thoughts?
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;45351116]how are you gonna use it[/QUOTE]
File storage/streaming mostly, I can't really think of much else to do with it.
[QUOTE=MasterFen006;45351177]File storage/streaming mostly, I can't really think of much else to do with it.[/QUOTE]
Should be enough for the task.
[QUOTE=kaukassus;45351343]Should be enough for the task.[/QUOTE]
Is there any stuff that it might not be able to do?
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;45351465]Gaming is one.
Storage is another. There's only 2 Sata ports on that motherboard. Unless you're investing in 2x4TB drives.[/QUOTE]
All the mATX ones come with 2, and only a couple ITX come with 4 and I didn't wanna go for an ITX system.
[QUOTE=Levelog;45350703]I wouldn't suggest it. It effectively doubles your chance of failure and all it does is increase sequential read and write where the SSD's specialty really lies on random. Plus increased capacities are faster to begin with[/QUOTE]
I disagree with this.
SSDs nowadays are quite reliable if you buy from reputable brands, and the chance of failure is quite low to begin with.
The increase in read and write performance isn't "random", but precisely doubled. I can confirm this myself since I have two identicle 256GB SSDs in my computer, and all the benchmarks on the internet supports this as well.
While you're right about larger capacity drives have a higher access speed, but the speed gain of a single large SSD vs 2 SSD half the size (assuming they're all the same brand and model series) are no where near twice the speed as you would find in the two SSD RAID setup.
Personally, I'd go with putting 2 SSDs in RAID 0 if money and hardware allows me. If you're paranoid about one of the drive failing, you can always make scheduled backups.
For once I love my phone provider.
It's pretty obvious now that about a week ago someone leaked Telus' list of cell phone users because everyone was suddenly flooded with SMS spam on Monday at 6PM. The guy at the phone store says that even the company phones are getting it. Because Telus has a spam-free guarantee however it means that since Monday they've been trying to find the numbers that have been carpet spamming everyone and any costs attributed with them are refunded.
It's a damn shame MS didn't do much for the X360 pad beyond "hurr buttons play video game". I've come to love the shape and weight, but the fact that there's no official driver for the chatpad and that the audio from the headphone jack is (very low quality) mono is... disappointing.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;45351626]I disagree with this.
SSDs nowadays are quite reliable if you buy from reputable brands, and the chance of failure is quite low to begin with.
The increase in read and write performance isn't "random", but precisely doubled. I can confirm this myself since I have two identicle 256GB SSDs in my computer, and all the benchmarks on the internet supports this as well.
While you're right about larger capacity drives have a higher access speed, but the speed gain of a single large SSD vs 2 SSD half the size (assuming they're all the same brand and model series) are no where near twice the speed as you would find in the two SSD RAID setup.
Personally, I'd go with putting 2 SSDs in RAID 0 if money and hardware allows me. If you're paranoid about one of the drive failing, you can always make scheduled backups.[/QUOTE]
Random as in random read/write. Not sequential read/write. And any RAID0 will double your chances of failure because you're relying on two drives. I'm not saying it's the worst idea, I just think a single 500 is a better choice
[QUOTE=Levelog;45350703]I wouldn't suggest it. It effectively doubles your chance of failure and all it does is increase sequential read and write where the SSD's specialty really lies on random. Plus increased capacities are faster to begin with[/QUOTE]
If speed really matters to you, though, it's usually processing large volumes of data - where generally sequential read / write is rather important.
There are few applications where a sequential read / write increase with similar random performance wouldn't be much of an improvement (that would imply having a data set of smaller non-sequentially-accessed pieces) outside of certain programs and in that case you can usually just load it up into RAM for a massive speed boost or use PCIe SSDs.
Also, RAID 10 is a thing if you don't want to just run Raid 0 and backup important data on hard disks which is pretty standard.
[editline]10th July 2014[/editline]
Unless I'm wrong and there are significant applications for programs that access small pieces of data constantly in a non-sequential manner, over a huge data set not financially feasible to be contained in RAM, which has to run faster than a set of RAIDed SSDs could access. Which there could be, in which case I wonder what they do as a solution.
[QUOTE=fishyfish777;45352436]If speed really matters to you, though, it's usually processing large volumes of data - where sequential read / write is rather important.
There are few applications where a sequential read / write increase with similar random performance wouldn't be much of an improvement (that would imply having a data set of smaller non-sequentially-accessed pieces) outside of certain programs and in that case you can usually just load it up into RAM for a massive speed boost or use PCIe SSDs.
Also, RAID 10 is a thing if you don't want to just run Raid 0 and backup important data on hard disks which is pretty standard.
[editline]10th July 2014[/editline]
Unless I'm wrong and there are significant applications for programs that access small pieces of data constantly in a non-sequential manner, over a huge data set not financially feasible to be contained in RAM, which has to run faster than a set of RAIDed SSDs could access. Which there could be, in which case I wonder what they do as a solution.[/QUOTE]
Congratulations, you just described databases.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;45352535]Congratulations, you just described databases.[/QUOTE]
What's the common solution(s) for running a database as fast as possible aside from using RAIDed SSDs / massive amount of RAM?
[QUOTE=fishyfish777;45352552]What's the common solution(s) for running a database as fast as possible aside from using RAIDed SSDs / massive amount of RAM?[/QUOTE]
For read-bound, having multiple replication servers running read queries, plus massive RAM caches. For write-bound, using RAID and/or SSDs.
[QUOTE=fishyfish777;45352436]If speed really matters to you, though, it's usually processing large volumes of data - where generally sequential read / write is rather important.
There are few applications where a sequential read / write increase with similar random performance wouldn't be much of an improvement (that would imply having a data set of smaller non-sequentially-accessed pieces) outside of certain programs and in that case you can usually just load it up into RAM for a massive speed boost or use PCIe SSDs.
Also, RAID 10 is a thing if you don't want to just run Raid 0 and backup important data on hard disks which is pretty standard.
[editline]10th July 2014[/editline]
Unless I'm wrong and there are significant applications for programs that access small pieces of data constantly in a non-sequential manner, over a huge data set not financially feasible to be contained in RAM, which has to run faster than a set of RAIDed SSDs could access. Which there could be, in which case I wonder what they do as a solution.[/QUOTE]
I have run a single RAID10 for over 2 years and I've had 2 drives fail and some how 3 get dropped and I've yet to knowingly have lost any data yet.
I don't know how.
I know TWO people who can't keep a RAID up worth a damn. Like clockwork they'll rebuild and six months later they'll suffer a single or double drive failure and they'll be forced to recover from an ancient backup.
Literally going through 1tb drives like floppy disks.
Is the array in a subwoofer box? How can they kill drives so fast. I have four 3TB seagate barracudas. These things are like the antithesis of enterprise and I seem to do alright.
I think people seriously underestimate how much RAM you can get into a server nowadays, in a business setting.
128GB is not unheard of. Especially when your business depends on it.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;45352811]Is the array in a subwoofer box? How can they kill drives so fast. I have four 3TB seagate barracudas. These things are like the antithesis of enterprise and I seem to do alright.[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.jax184.com/pictures/T3i_0416s.JPG]Hell do I know. His setup is pretty solid.[/url]
How unreliable is SMS? I read it's 1-5% but in general I haven't had many issues with it.
I'm just figuring out the best way for coms with a small group of crew in a large venue and it seems like sms is best considering the situation and circumstances.
would FRS radios not be cheaper?
we might get walkie talkies but probably not for my department so I'm figuring out the best solution that doesn't cost us anything or much at all.
Situation:
location is shoddy reception, has wifi but not sure about the coverage and speeds, 1 person has an old blackberry without mobile data but has voice, sms, unlimited bbm, facebook and twitter, can connect to wifi to use other services but may be shoddy with 3rd party app for hangouts or skype, etc. 1 person has an iPhone, no mobile data, only voice and sms. I have voice, sms, data so I'm generally fine but I cannot send MMS since it would cost me to send not would be free to receieve. I'm not sure about the other peoples MMS situation. We may just use group sms and/or call. Everyone else has voice, sms and data, android or iOS smartphone, can install or already have Google Hangouts, Skype and BBM. Skype is out because battery drain issues and shitty mobile client. If I can get the 1 with the iPhone to get a data plan, we can use BBM.
[QUOTE=garychencool;45353393]How unreliable is SMS? I read it's 1-5% but in general I haven't had many issues with it.
I'm just figuring out the best way for coms with a small group of crew in a large venue and it seems like sms is best considering the situation and circumstances.[/QUOTE]
Depending on the size of the venue, nearby towers could be overloaded. Last year I went to a public event with a couple thousand people, and Verizon towers were next to useless. Data obviously was worthless but even SMS and general calls were incredibly unreliable. 1 out of [I]50[/I] attempts to call would make it far enough to even ring let alone connect. SMS took nearly 40 minutes to send, if they even sent at all. If its a large event like that, I would into to standard radios. As I guarantee that spectrum won't be crowded.
[QUOTE=Demache;45353601]Depending on the size of the venue, nearby towers could be overloaded. Last year I went to a public event with a couple thousand people, and Verizon towers were next to useless. Data obviously was worthless but even SMS and general calls were incredibly unreliable. 1 out of [I]50[/I] attempts to call would make it far enough to even ring let alone connect. SMS took nearly 40 minutes to send, if they even sent at all. If its a large event like that, I would into to standard radios. As I guarantee that spectrum won't be crowded.[/QUOTE]
I was at an event called Anime North and anyone on Wind could barely call or SMS. Rogers and Bell was just fine. It was around 20-30,000 people in a 500 meter radius and my friend on Bell was easily able to speedtest and get 50 down on his S4.
[video=youtube;Ou82Gv3pw2s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou82Gv3pw2s[/video]
Ezhik's ancestors used to be tiny as fuck.
[QUOTE=garychencool;45353797]I was at an event called Anime North and anyone on Wind could barely call or SMS. Rogers and Bell was just fine. It was around 20-30,000 people in a 500 meter radius and my friend on Bell was easily able to speedtest and get 50 down on his S4.[/QUOTE]
It all depends on how many customers in the area. Verizon is by far the most common here, so its would obviously be overloaded, but AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint are much less common, so they may have been fine. But I don't know anyone with those carriers so... :v: Still, banking your communications on a system that is largely out of your control and is shared with every single other person there, is very risky.
[QUOTE=Demache;45354279]It all depends on how many customers in the area. Verizon is by far the most common here, so its would obviously be overloaded, but AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint are much less common, so they may have been fine. But I don't know anyone with those carriers so... :v: Still, banking your communications on a system that is largely out of your control and is shared with every single other person there, is very risky.[/QUOTE]
I was told by many American friends that Verizon has best coverage, data speeds and reliability but costs an ass load.
Anyways yeah if we don't get radios, we're gonna have to use good old sms..
[QUOTE=garychencool;45354392]I was told by many American friends that Verizon has best coverage, data speeds and reliability but costs an ass load.
Anyways yeah if we don't get radios, we're gonna have to use good old sms..[/QUOTE]
Oh by far it does. Especially cost. And they practically have a monopoly locally because they are the only carrier to bother going beyond Sioux Falls and the interstate. Except AT&T, who thought fuck Sioux Falls with with pop of 200k, they only get 3G, but put LTE in the town of 4,000.
[QUOTE=Demache;45354594]Oh by far it does. Especially cost. And they practically have a monopoly locally because they are the only carrier to bother going beyond Sioux Falls and the interstate. Except AT&T, who thought fuck Sioux Falls with with pop of 200k, they only get 3G, but put LTE in the town of 4,000.[/QUOTE]
I find it sad that the big 3 in Canada are using the same plan pricing miking Canadians with their more expensive plans now than it was some months ago, and since late last year when Canada ditched 3 year contract. Also like how Verizon is still cheaper than Rogers and it comes with more data if you compare Verizon single line $60 plan to the minimum $80 plan from Rogers that only comes with half the data bucket Verizon has on that $60 plan.
Cool. My banks website is down and my debit card doesn't work...
I can't even check my balance. I've got a couple bills I just paid that are still processing right now. >:(
[QUOTE=garychencool;45353593]we might get walkie talkies but probably not for my department so I'm figuring out the best solution that doesn't cost us anything or much at all.
Situation:
location is shoddy reception, has wifi but not sure about the coverage and speeds, 1 person has an old blackberry without mobile data but has voice, sms, unlimited bbm, facebook and twitter, can connect to wifi to use other services but may be shoddy with 3rd party app for hangouts or skype, etc. 1 person has an iPhone, no mobile data, only voice and sms. I have voice, sms, data so I'm generally fine but I cannot send MMS since it would cost me to send not would be free to receieve. I'm not sure about the other peoples MMS situation. We may just use group sms and/or call. Everyone else has voice, sms and data, android or iOS smartphone, can install or already have Google Hangouts, Skype and BBM. Skype is out because battery drain issues and shitty mobile client. If I can get the 1 with the iPhone to get a data plan, we can use BBM.[/QUOTE]
I'd recommend [URL="http://zello.com/"]Zello[/URL]. It supports all the devices you mention and you can have them on a group to easily chat to all of them. We even use it here at the shop (even though it's just a few of us that use it), but it's good to contact each other easily.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
