0

At my postpro studio we have a SAN Network (Stornext 6). There is also a MediaShuttle and FTP server in a VM on the firewall (I know, I know... Not my fault, really xD). The VM is sharing SAN over CIFS so everytime we need to send some files we need to upload them to the MediaShuttle or FTP server at 1Gbps Ethernet speed, witch is awful when u try to upload for example 200Gb. It takes 5h or so if the VM doesn't hang in the process.

My ABSOLUTLY TEMPORAL solution to this mess is using a Windows SAN client with a Storage Server for Mediashuttle. This put the transfer process to an affordable 45 mins.

This is just temporal because something like MediaShuttle/FTP/Aspera needs to go to the DMZ and never directly connected to the SAN network. Also Netflix, HBO and the TPN (Trusted Partner Network) forbids you to do that.

I was thinking about having a server on the DMZ connected to the Firewall thought a 10Gb cards and then another 10Gb card to our SAN. It won't be as fast as directly connected to the SAN but... I cannot think on a better solution for this.

Am I missing something? Thank you all!

Urien
  • 1

2 Answers2

0

Dedicated, fully utilized 1 gigabit link should be getting better than quarter terabyte (250 GB) per hour. If not, you have a bottleneck.

Check link speed and utilization of all IP and storage network links. Both physical and virtual. Plus disk, CPU, and firewall utilization. Sample a small packet capture to check that IP is performing optimally.

Consider 25 Gbit Ethernet from workstations all the way to the storage array. Adapters may only a little more expensive than 10 Gbit.

John Mahowald
  • 30,009
  • 1
  • 17
  • 32
  • I just when to the calculator and you are right. It should perform better. Probable the bottleneck is in the VM. I simply when from that VM to a SAN wired machine but I should try a normal ethernet machine first. Thanks! – Urien May 24 '19 at 15:06
  • Attributing it to the VM explains nothing. Could be the physical NICs, could be the storage system, could be CPU. Find out what the bottleneck is. – John Mahowald May 24 '19 at 16:22
  • That's also true. What I meant is something in this whole system around the VM is bottlenecking it. I don't want to waste efforts on that since I want to migrate that to a dedicated server. – Urien May 27 '19 at 14:41
0

Concerning Aspera transfer, IBM provides a proxy server Aspera Proxy Server that allows external users to securely get the files directly but securely from the storage without a copy.

laurent
  • 66
  • 4