In another thread, it was mentioned:

axelo:
i use to connect to Terrablock (which SUCKS BIG TIME - piece of crap)

jef
getting editing systems optimized to take advantage of them is no walk in the park

Randall L. Rike
I'd like to hear more about your issues and experiences with TerraBlock. Ours has performed exactly as advertised, and works well for us.  We have 8 servers, for 120TB's.  I can deliver 10-12 stereams of 4:4:4, and many more 4:2:2.  However, we maxxed out the config, so we have optimal bandwidth.  Each of the 4 servers that service Telecine (4:4:4) are quad-ported to a QLogic 9000 Series Switch.  The 4 servers that service the Symphony Nitris's, DS Nitris's and FCP (including 4:4:4) are dual-ported to the switch.  The Telecine client systems are dual-ported, and the Avids are single ported.

... let the discussion begin ...

Jef, what "optimization" are you referring to?  For us it's:

- ATTO Driver (32 or 64 bit)
- ATTO Firmware
- ATTO Express Power Center or Express Stripe version (32 or 64 bit)
- Connection Mode = Point-to-Point (PTP
- Connection Speed = Set to 4GB (not /Automatic)
- TerraBlock Manager version

We had TerribleBlock on the last movie I was working on and it became a serious pain in the ass for all of us. There is no doubt that it basically performs as advertised, but that's the problem - it doesn't really help the workflow since you always have to keep refreshing readonly volumes.

Our major concern was the fact that it couldn't be used to share the project but the media only. We spent more time turning-over the bins and tracking the changes than actually editing.

I guess TerribleBlock can be quite-ok in an environment where project sharing is not an issue or is managed by a separate Unity, but having only TB on a film is simply useless (production was cutting costs).

Not to mention the funny stuff like the fact that TB always crashes when new ATTO client was connected for the first time... and the procedure required to start the TB when you have more of them is totally ridiculous...

Simply TB left the worst impression on me from the technical point of view as well as the workflow point of view and I won't be willing to work with one in the future.

Well, I partially agree.  For feature film editing we have 6 Unity & LANshare systems.  Nothing can touch them.  And, any editor that works here will know how to use it.  I wouldn't recommend TerraBlock for film editing.

Unity offers full project sharing, completely transparent shared Workspaces, the ability to resize workspaces on-the-fly, etc.  Unity is by far my favorite Avid product.

We only use TerraBlock for HD editing, either DS Nitris, Symphony Nitris, FCP, Clipster, Nucoda, or DRS. None of these require true shared projects or media.  Although, on DS Assist, we just tap into the Media Indexer of the main DS.

And, no argument, TerraBlock isn't the most "elegant" interface.  But, if need multiple 4:4:4 streams, and want a great TB/$$ ratio, it's agreat solution.

"Not to mention the funny stuff like the fact that TB always crashes when new ATTO client was connected for the first time ..."

We've never experienced that.  Is the Connection Mode set properly to Point-to-Point (PTP)?  I also suggest setting the Connection Speed to a set value, e.g. 4GB, rather than Automatic.

"... and the procedure required to start the TB when you have more of them is totally ridiculous..."

Are you referring to having to run disk Manager/Scan Drives to getthem to see each other.  If so, I agree, and have mentioned it to them.

Hello all,

I would agree with Randy mostly.  We use the Terrablock to serve multiple rooms of DS and in one situation multiple Symphonies.  Yes, the lack of project sharing is a bit of a pain in that situation.  But - for that client - the cost savings versus the cost to go to a Unity has been well worth the limited pain.  Every project will be different.

New software from Facilis has helped in some of the areas discussed.  You can now resize workspace ( well the equivalent in Terrablock speak anyway.).  You can also run a script that automatically rescans the read only partitions every 5 minutes.  A little kludgey, but better than nothing.

Gotta say, we do not have the crashes you speak of.  And my comment about "getting editing systems optimized" was not so much focused on Terrablock details but the bigger picture.  For example with DS systems sharing projects, this has come down to very careful network setup and management, a dedicated Project Manager computer, and certain workflows inside DS.  As we get more experienced, the better and more reliable the system is becoming.  It is not just the Terrablock, it is the system it serves.

Don't walk away from Terrablock because of one bad experience.  They are growing.  They promise file level sharing in the near future.  And so far, they have delivered on all their promises.

Cheers,

Jef

"... You can now resize workspaces  ..."

Unfortunately, this doesn't work on "spanned " volumes.  And all of our volumes are spanned.

We use TerraBlock for sharing media between 3 ProTools bays.  After about 2 weeks of daily troubleshooting client crashes when being connected, we diagnosed that the documented driver version for the celerity card was incorrect.  When we upgraded the driver version (or actually, downgraded, I believe), the environment became stable.

As far as I know, it's been running rather well since then. 

At first, I loathed it.  Being a Unity tech., the clunky interface mixed with the lack of "Avid Unity" ability just made it cumbersome (not to mention the constant client crashes).  But when I changed my mindset about it, I realized that it works for this particular environment.

The most important thing for me was accepting the fact that it is not a Unity.  Unity is smoothe.  Workspaces mount, dismount, create new workspaces, resize them, log in, log out, whatever.  It's just what I'm used to.  TerraBlock is not that.  It is a perfect solution for having "Local Storage" that is in the room next door.  Local Storage that other people can connect to without having to disconnect cables and carry drives from one bay to another. 

It's not a Unity.  Not in price, and not in functionality.  Once I accepted that, I learned to appreciate it for what it is.

~Hammer

Good discription Hammer.

This is truly a non negative example of you get what you pay for.  Terrablock is nowhere as expensive as Unity. Nor is it as feature rich. But for it's price, it can serve many purposes well.  For us, it is better than Unity since Unity will not come close to serving our needs - Multiple DS clients running HD.  This is just not supported by Unity.  So we can get some of the features at a fair price.  Unity would do nothing for us.

So, as in most cases in this business, it all depends ...

Jef

When I was working for an Avid reseller, that also sold TerraBlock, I suggested this ... rather than comparing TerraBlock to Unity with features missing, compare it to local SCSI drives, with features added.