bpzle 0 Posted November 28, 2010 Anyone tried using the consumer grade NAS devices with Mobotix? Any luck? I'm looking at 1TB units on Amazon for around $150 or less. Any reason why that's a bad idea? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thewireguys 3 Posted November 28, 2010 I have used QNAP and Mobotix recommends Overland Storage. http://www.overlandstorage.com/ I would skip the cheap units. Are you going to use MXCC, Easy or the web interface? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bpzle 0 Posted November 28, 2010 Ironically, I would want to go with Mobotix to save money vs my tranditional nvr or dvr approach. I have 2 seperate jobs where only 1 camera is needed. I realize a $500 or more NAS would be ideal but what would the major drawbacks be if I went with a WD My Book World NAS? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thewireguys 3 Posted November 28, 2010 Why not just use the onboard storage for one camera? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bpzle 0 Posted November 28, 2010 I'd like to get the customer at least 2 weeks of storeage for a medium traffic area. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voipmodo 0 Posted November 28, 2010 we have good luck with the seagate black armor drives. I have installed them on small projects and have customers who have used them in school district installs. With the messed up sales channels we have found its actually cheaper to buy from amazon or newegg for NAS drives then through distribution in most cases. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sawbones 0 Posted November 28, 2010 Another recommendation for Seagate. They've been my go-to hard drive for a number of years, and rarely do they disappoint me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ipcamerastoreusa 0 Posted November 30, 2010 Another recommendation for QNAP. Their price-quality ratio is very good! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Simon Hall 0 Posted October 21, 2011 This tutorial might be useful to installers looking for a NAS guideline: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zON2YYHJ95s Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ssmith10pn 0 Posted October 21, 2011 Avigilon gave us a file that tests write speeds on a drive. Pretty Eye Opening stuff. The Avigilon Servers with the Onboard RAID 5 SAN Drives were in the 280MBPS range and the NS-480 SAN was 480MBPS. No that's not a typo. Mega Bytes not Mega bits. I'll bet those cheap NAS drives won't write 100Mbps. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ak357 0 Posted October 22, 2011 Avigilon gave us a file that tests write speeds on a drive. Pretty Eye Opening stuff. The Avigilon Servers with the Onboard RAID 5 SAN Drives were in the 280MBPS range and the NS-480 SAN was 480MBPS. No that's not a typo. Mega Bytes not Mega bits. What number do u use to calculate Max bandwidth per server ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ssmith10pn 0 Posted October 23, 2011 Avigilon gave us a file that tests write speeds on a drive. Pretty Eye Opening stuff. The Avigilon Servers with the Onboard RAID 5 SAN Drives were in the 280MBPS range and the NS-480 SAN was 480MBPS. No that's not a typo. Mega Bytes not Mega bits. What number do u use to calculate Max bandwidth per server ? 250Mbps We have not hit that yet. Next week will will have enough cameras online to hit that number. I have one server with 15 (5Mp) cameras running at about 175Mbps I have another server with 14 (1Mp), 4 (2Mp), and 11 (4channel Encoders) running at 75Mbps I have 10 More (5Mp) cameras coming on line next week. Ironically, the server with the 15 (5Mp) cameras gets about 14 days on 5TB of storage and the second server takes 15TB to get the same amount of time. Server 1 is in a parking deck so there is very little motion. Server 2 is in a Hospital that is very active 24/7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ak357 0 Posted October 23, 2011 250Mbps We have not hit that yet. Next week will will have enough cameras online to hit that number. I have one server with 15 (5Mp) cameras running at about 175Mbps I have another server with 14 (1Mp), 4 (2Mp), and 11 (4channel Encoders) running at 75Mbps I have 10 More (5Mp) cameras coming on line next week. Ironically, the server with the 15 (5Mp) cameras gets about 14 days on 5TB of storage and the second server takes 15TB to get the same amount of time. Server 1 is in a parking deck so there is very little motion. Server 2 is in a Hospital that is very active 24/7 Agree, my max limit is 256 mbps did not hit limits yet have 3 servers on customer location 23cam 12 cams 16 cams All 2 mp h.264 23 cams doing about 160-180 mbps Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ssmith10pn 0 Posted October 23, 2011 Server 1 Server 2 Server 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ak357 0 Posted October 23, 2011 server1 Server with 23 cams Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ssmith10pn 0 Posted October 23, 2011 What did I miss? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soundy 1 Posted October 23, 2011 What did I miss? Nothing to see here, go on about your business... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ssmith10pn 0 Posted October 24, 2011 LOL! " title="Applause" /> Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frank3 0 Posted October 24, 2011 3% CPU for 23 cams?? How much bandwidth is that server dealing with? Are you sure the cameras are connected? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soundy 1 Posted October 24, 2011 Receiving network data and writing it to disk isn't particularly processor-intensive... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hardwired 0 Posted October 24, 2011 It usually depends if your NVR software does any transcoding or post-processing of the data stream from the camera, or if that is handled by the viewing client. For example, Milestone/ONSSI does a lot of processing on the streams, and is fairly processor intensive, Avigilon and Exacq don't seem to do anywhere near as much processing, and so have a much lower processor load. This can be deceptive in system planning, though, as you can easily overload a NVR with streams that exceed the disk system write capability, which is not as apparent in a quick view in the task manager (Win7 has much better options for viewing that load compared to XP, although you may want to use a third party testing S/W to test your write limits). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ssmith10pn 0 Posted October 24, 2011 3% CPU for 23 cams?? How much bandwidth is that server dealing with? Are you sure the cameras are connected? My screen shots show DU meter as well. Pay close attention to Server 2. That's 15 Avigilon 5mp cameras. server1 server2 server3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thewireguys 3 Posted October 24, 2011 3% CPU for 23 cams?? How much bandwidth is that server dealing with? Are you sure the cameras are connected? My screen shots show DU meter as well. Pay close attention to Server 2. That's 15 Avigilon 5mp cameras. server1 server2 server3 What FPS and quality setting? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soundy 1 Posted October 25, 2011 It usually depends if your NVR software does any transcoding or post-processing of the data stream from the camera, or if that is handled by the viewing client. For example, Milestone/ONSSI does a lot of processing on the streams, and is fairly processor intensive, Avigilon and Exacq don't seem to do anywhere near as much processing, and so have a much lower processor load. Good point, although that really just reinforces what I said: simply receiving the stream and writing it to disk is not processor-intensive... it's all that other stuff that is, particularly the decoding that's required for everything else to happen (analytics, motion detection, transcoding, etc.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites