Avigilon recording to NAS possible?

[dewalty 0]

I have a server running the control centre software. The software is able to see the hardrive installed on the server, the mapped NAS is not visible. I am able to schedule backups to it though. Can any one point me in the right direction to get this to work or will it only see drives attached internally to the server?

 

Thanks

[ssmith10pn 0]

It has to show up in Windows as a Drive Letter.

 

What kind of NAS?

[Soundy 1]

It probably won't use SMB-attached drives, even if it's mapped to a drive letter - Vigil is like this, as well. You may need to use iSCSI to attach the NAS (providing your NAS supports it).

[thewireguys 3]

You CAN NOT record directly to a NAS you will need a NAS that supports iSCSi to record directly to the unit. You CAN back up to a NAS as you already have seen.

[ssmith10pn 0]

And I do believe ISCSI requires a dedicated Ethernet port.

[chesterfield 0]

You can record to the NAS if it is set up as an iSCSI device. It does not need to have its own dedicated eithernet port to the server. This is exactly how I have set up my Avigilon server.

 

The Avigilon software needs direct access to the drive root I believe as I noticed that once set-up the drive appeared to have only 5GB free (out of 2TB) even though the server had not recorded any data (no cameras attached at the time). In laymans terms I believe it creates an empty database within the space on the drive and begins to fill it/overwrite as necessary.

 

I have no diagram of mine but I have all cameras connected to the 10/100 POE ports on a POE switch that has only 2 Gigabit ports. The server is connected to one Gigabit port on the POE switch, the 2nd Gigabit port links to a non POE 24 port gigabit switch. This non POE switch has all other network devices connected to it (pc clients, media NAS etc). It also has the NAS for the Avigilon software connected.

 

The reason I did not have the server and Avigilon NAS connected to the same POE switch, is that I wanted gigabit access to the server from other clients within the home.

 

I did not test trying to set up the NAS as a mapped drive, but looking at how the Avigilon server software addressed the drive, I doubt it would be possible without some serious tweaking of the server OS, and that would no doubt put a lot more requirement on the server processor than a simple iSCSI.

 

This does however mean that you will only be able to use the NAS for Avigilon (or at least the portion of the NAS you assign to the iSCSI volume).

 

Hope that helps.

[dewalty 0]

Thanks for the prompt replies. Just using a readynas duo at the moment, a larger NAS is being looked at with the iSCSI in mind. Most useful comments from you all.

 

Thanks

[chesterfield 0]

ReadyNas can do iSCSI, it is just not supported by Netgear and is a custom hack.

 

http://whocares.de/readynas-goes-iscsi/

 

I do not own a readynas, nor have I attempted the above, so I cannot vouch for how well, or indeed if, it will work.

[ssmith10pn 0]

You can record to the NAS if it is set up as an iSCSI device. It does not need to have its own dedicated eithernet port to the server. This is exactly how I have set up my Avigilon server.

 

The Avigilon software needs direct access to the drive root I believe as I noticed that once set-up the drive appeared to have only 5GB free (out of 2TB) even though the server had not recorded any data (no cameras attached at the time). In laymans terms I believe it creates an empty database within the space on the drive and begins to fill it/overwrite as necessary.

 

I have no diagram of mine but I have all cameras connected to the 10/100 POE ports on a POE switch that has only 2 Gigabit ports. The server is connected to one Gigabit port on the POE switch, the 2nd Gigabit port links to a non POE 24 port gigabit switch. This non POE switch has all other network devices connected to it (pc clients, media NAS etc). It also has the NAS for the Avigilon software connected.

 

The reason I did not have the server and Avigilon NAS connected to the same POE switch, is that I wanted gigabit access to the server from other clients within the home.

 

I did not test trying to set up the NAS as a mapped drive, but looking at how the Avigilon server software addressed the drive, I doubt it would be possible without some serious tweaking of the server OS, and that would no doubt put a lot more requirement on the server processor than a simple iSCSI.

 

This does however mean that you will only be able to use the NAS for Avigilon (or at least the portion of the NAS you assign to the iSCSI volume).

 

Hope that helps.

 

 

How many cameras and what type on this system?

I'm just curious of the load.

Also, how many clients are connected to the server?

[chesterfield 0]

Mine is purely a residential setup so load is minimal at present with only four cameras, 3 x 2mp, 1 x 5mp (although the 5mp is still not on as it is on its way from Canada at the moment).

 

Cameras are 2mp domes (Avigilon - H264 compression) and 5mp Dome (Avigilon - JPG2000 compression)

 

Ive calculated load at only around 60 Megabit for now (the camera install utility from Avigilon showed the 2mb cameras at 11-12mb when running at full 30ips), if I expand to the 8 cameras I envisage (a further 3 x 2mp and 1 x 5mp) then Im probably looking at around 120-150 Megabit depending on the bandwidth requirement of the jpeg2000 5mp cameras.

 

Maximum client count at any one point I envisage would be two, with possibly a third remote viewing on the web or mobile.

 

Obviously accounting for overhead and the need to communicate with cameras, clients and the NAS, using a single ethernet connection to do all the work, I could envisage possibly running into problems at a lower camera count than if the NAS and server had their own ethernet link to each other. As mine is just a domestic installation I will probably/hopefully never come close to that camera count though. For larger corporate size installations I would assume a dedicated nic for the link to the NAS would probably be more appropriate.

[hardwired 0]

You can also create your own iSCSI storage with FreeNAS, and some adequate PC hardware, as well.

 

Avigilon (and Exacq, and some others) need direct block-level drive access (direct attached or iSCSI), versus file-level storage (what most standard NAS devices provide), because they need high speed, direct drive access to directly archive to.

 

Some other VMS's (Milestone/ONSSI, for example) do their archiving differently, in multiple stages, allowing a small "first day" direct attached drive, and then archiving to a secondary location at a lower speed.

[Soundy 1]

And I do believe ISCSI requires a dedicated Ethernet port.

It does not.

 

I direct you to my standard setup for the client using these systems:

 

 

The RAID in this case (Promise and Enhance units) has separate iSCSI data ports and management port - you can't access the management console from the iSCSI interface - but others (QNAP, Synology) do both iSCSI data and management through the same port.

 

Avigilon (and Exacq, and some others) need direct block-level drive access (direct attached or iSCSI), versus file-level storage (what most standard NAS devices provide), because they need high speed, direct drive access to directly archive to.

 

The reason given to me for Vigil not working with SMB shares is that they're not reliable enough in reconnecting after a system restart... which in my experience, is certainly possible - I've had more than a few instances of network drive shares not reconnecting properly after a reboot.

 

But your explanation makes sense too

[ssmith10pn 0]

My main concern with the ISCSI on the same port was bandwidth. If you have 250Mb of incoming data and all your cameras see motion at once you also have 250Mb going out to the ISCSI. Not including the client data.

 

Sure is a lot easier to throw in a second NIC and segregate the ISCSI data. Or in the case of an Avigilon server you have 4 NICs and you team 2 for incoming camera data and team 2 for outgoing ISCSI. Or in our case scrap that idea and go HBA. which are 4Gb minimum.

[Soundy 1]

My main concern with the ISCSI on the same port was bandwidth. If you have 250Mb of incoming data and all your cameras see motion at once you also have 250Mb going out to the ISCSI. Not including the client data.

Granted, although it's going to take a pretty big install to hit that... in any case, that's a system-dependent design consideration; my answer remains the same: iSCSI *does not* REQUIRE a separate NIC. Again, this is the load on the single NIC in a system running 28 H.264 cameras at D1, and three 2MP H.264 cameras, all recording to an iSCSI array, all with plenty of activity:

 

[ak357 0]

My main concern with the ISCSI on the same port was bandwidth. If you have 250Mb of incoming data and all your cameras see motion at once you also have 250Mb going out to the ISCSI. Not including the client data.

Granted, although it's going to take a pretty big install to hit that... in any case, that's a system-dependent design consideration; my answer remains the same: iSCSI *does not* REQUIRE a separate NIC. Again, this is the load on the single NIC in a system running 28 H.264 cameras at D1, and three 2MP H.264 cameras, all recording to an iSCSI array, all with plenty of activity:

 

 

Is this HIK card ?

[Soundy 1]

I believe so, yes.

[ssmith10pn 0]

Just wanted to throw some eye candy in the mix.

 

[thewireguys 3]

Just wanted to throw some eye candy in the mix.

 

 

 

Nice!! What nic card are you using?

[hardwired 0]

Just wanted to throw some eye candy in the mix.

 

 

 

Nice!! What nic card are you using?

And, what server are you using that's able to handle 1.1Gbps of traffic, at 12% CPU?

Tech porn, again!

[ssmith10pn 0]

I think the IS guys were having a little fun today.

 

[ssmith10pn 0]

 

 

 

[ak357 0]

[/

 

I wondering

how many Dahua DVR this rack can hold

I will have to call my friend in Bahamas