Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

eSata External Drive max capacity


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   p4594spa

p4594spa

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 52 posts
Joined: Jul 20, 2006

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:31 PM

I have access to some quite large eSata Raid boxes. Is there a maximum
capacity that the Directv OS (Linux of some sort) will support?

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#2 OFFLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 13,547 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:34 PM

Some here have done 9-12Tb on the 34. Not saying that's the limit, but the largest I've seen someone try. However I don't think the others can do that, might still be 2Tb.

Keep in mind, even with raid, currently there is a single point of failure, the DVR.

#3 OFFLINE   Richierich

Richierich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 8,479 posts
Joined: Jan 10, 2008

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:10 AM

Some here have done 9-12Tb on the 34.


Does that slow the HR34 down at all with all of those Recordings on it???

Too bad Directv doesn't tie the Recordings to the Owner's Account Number and Not the RID Number then when the DVR dies you just get a Replacement and hook up your Old Drives and you are back in business without losing any Recordings.
*
DIRECTV CUSTOMER SINCE 1997
Here's My Setup

#4 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,069 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:33 AM

I have access to some quite large eSata Raid boxes. Is there a maximum
capacity that the Directv OS (Linux of some sort) will support?


The limit for an HR2X is 2TB. There is no limit for an HR34. I'm the one of the ones who has tried out large eSATA RAID enclosures. I've tried out up to 12TB and it works fine.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#5 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,069 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:35 AM

Does that slow the HR34 down at all with all of those Recordings on it???


I didn't fill mine up when I had the 9TB on it, I'm down to 4TB now, but it had tons of stuff on it and still had 95% avail. It would take a very long time to fill up 9TB, or 12TB, to see if it affected performance once you got close to being full.

Too bad Directv doesn't tie the Recordings to the Owner's Account Number and Not the RID Number then when the DVR dies you just get a Replacement and hook up your Old Drives and you are back in business without losing any Recordings.


Maybe one day, with all of us asking nicely, they'll switch and allow eSATA drives to be moved between DVRs on an account.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#6 OFFLINE   Podkayne

Podkayne

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 173 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2007

Posted 05 December 2012 - 08:04 PM

With Whole Home, I've got a nearly dead HR-20 that stays on my account ONLY BECAUSE we have 2 TB's of programming on it that we want to watch. If I could hang that external 2 TB array on my HR-34 Genie and watch that stuff I would junk that HR 20 today. (As it is, I'm doing the same thing by leaving the HR20 on my account; we just watch it using Whole Home. And it will probably take at least a year to watch all that stuff.)

I believe that better portability of the drive contents would simplify a lot of current setups.

#7 OFFLINE   TomCat

TomCat

    Broadcast Engineer

  • Registered
  • 3,645 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2002

Posted 08 December 2012 - 09:22 PM

Does that slow the HR34 down at all with all of those Recordings on it???...

Contrary to reports even on this forum, no it doesn't. If you think about it, the only thing in play regarding the HDD is the file it is reading from or writing to (or both). Files not accessed have no way of being part of the slowdowns.

It's a little different on a PC or Mac because those files can fragment much more when a drive reaches 80-90% full, while only the free space can fragment on a DVR (and then with little effect). You can run the drive completely full, with the only problem being you no longer can record anything else. I've done it a few times.

A lot of people connect the dots a little incorrectly, which is probably why the myth continues. There are a lot of reasons why a DVR with fewer recorded files is faster than one with more recorded files, but most of those reasons are not connected to that fact, they are instead merely coincidental. One of the things that makes a new DVR zippy is that it has none or few SLs on it, and fewer user prefs configured. The closer a DVR is to "factory", the faster it can run. But content not being accessed has no way of being part of that. The DVR could not care less if the bits it is not accessing are flipped to ones or zeroes, and neither could the parts of the database that are not being accessed that represent those files. That would be as ludicrous as your DVD player caring how many DVDs you have on the shelf.

Personally, I think a goal of more than 2 TB passes a point of diminishing returns. You can get about 475 hours of HD content on a 2 TB drive, and who needs to keep that much stuff (even though I currently have about 740 hours spread over 4 DVRs)? Unfortunately a DVR is a cache platform, not an archiving platform; and even more unfortunately there are no good or practical archiving platforms for HD due to DRM.

Not only that, but it is devastating to lose 400 hours of recorded content, and correspondingly more devastating to lose more if you have the ability to store more. The question about a HDD or DVR failing is not "if", it is "when". My approach is to double record on two DVRs, and to use four to minimize the potential drama of a failure and to get enough tuners. I would never put all of my recordings on a single platform, which to me is the classic "all eggs in one basket" mistake.

But I would reconsider that if DTV had a Hopper, and would let me have two of them.

Edited by TomCat, 08 December 2012 - 09:29 PM.

  • hasan likes this
It's usually safe to talk honestly and openly with people because they typically are not really listening anyway.

#8 OFFLINE   Richierich

Richierich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 8,479 posts
Joined: Jan 10, 2008

Posted 09 December 2012 - 06:54 AM

I have 7 DVRs and 3 or those 7 DVRs are there as Backup DVRs where I do Record things I want to keep as Archived so I Record them on 2 DVRs in case of one failing which it eventually will fail, I will have the Recording on the other DVR until that one fails.

Too bad Directv can't sell us Space on a Server so we can Backup those Recordings that we want to keep which would solve the problem but until that time (probably will never happen) I will use my system of Archiving by Replicating or Duplicating Recordings on 2 DVRs. :D
*
DIRECTV CUSTOMER SINCE 1997
Here's My Setup

#9 OFFLINE   UhClem

UhClem

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 22 posts
Joined: Oct 01, 2009

Posted 10 December 2012 - 01:25 AM

Does that slow the HR34 down at all with all of those Recordings on it???

Contrary to reports even on this forum, no it doesn't. If you think about it, the only thing in play regarding the HDD is the file it is reading from or writing to (or both). Files not accessed have no way of being part of the slowdowns.

[Note: there are fileS being written, one per active tuner.]
Recordings not accessed are most definitely a factor in the slowdown--they get in the way--i.e., they extend the distance between where the disk heads want to be (Data) and where they need to be (Media). If you think about it, as the HD-DVR fills up with recordings, the new/current recordings are being written to the disk further and further away, in the Media filesystem, from the Data filesystem (the first 16GB). Since the Media writes, and reads, have top priority (else you get dropouts/stutters), they take the disk heads (further and further) away from the Data section; and, since user interaction with the DVR is mainly dependent on access to that Data, responsiveness suffers. Not maddeningly, but noticeably.

I've experienced it. And now I've simulated it using a seek-time benchmark program (a personal hack) with the following results:
[For 2 tuners being recorded, plus a playback stream:]
Fullness       Slowdown
    0%               0% [baseline]
   25%              ~5%
   50%             ~10%
   75%             ~15%
   95%             ~20%
[Why 95%, and not 100% ? Because, even a chock full (1-2% free) HD-DVR (500GB disk) has 30+ GB still free. Reserved for PPV? :)]

--UhClem
-----------
::Hey, it's nice out.
==Yeah, I think you ought to leave it out.

#10 OFFLINE   Richierich

Richierich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 8,479 posts
Joined: Jan 10, 2008

Posted 10 December 2012 - 07:24 AM

I had heard the same thing from a PC Programmer who stated the same thing as you stated which is there is some slowdown or wait time due to the higher percentage of disk space used.

Also an Overworked CPU could be at fault here also.
*
DIRECTV CUSTOMER SINCE 1997
Here's My Setup

#11 OFFLINE   RussBarr

RussBarr

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 8 posts
Joined: Sep 20, 2010

Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:38 AM

I agree with UhClem clam that as a drive becomes full it's over all response time will slow down when it seeks from inter tracks to outer tracks on the disk. Unlike PC that may need to SEEK many different files DRV are more block orientated devices. That is to say once a head is in place the data of interest is mostly continuous and additional seeking is not required or is minimal as tracks are changed.

I do not know about the HR34 since I have 4 different HR2X each with 2TB drives.

I do not believe that a properly designed system should suffer any significant slow down especial when it is only recording one stream (the one you are watching) in it normal state.

Modern day LINUX systems have disk CASH system and modern drive have intelligent seek algorithms and large disk buffers that can be accused without requiring any seek latency.

There just aren't enough seeks and disk transfer going on in a single viewer mode of the HR34 to justify a 20% slow down due to a 95% full drive when the system is designed for much higher throughput.

There is some other system (software, CPU, and Memory) aspect going on here especially in the HR2X series where a +70% drives causes the remote to be not only slow but ignored on some key strokes for long (10s) time frames but not once you get it attention (skipping forward) each button push is processed.

I am hoping that the newest software 62c will resolve some of this. I received this update on my HR20-700 but it no longer supports my RAID controller SLI5744 so I lost my almost full 2TB drive and started over. I have not yet received this update on my three other HR2X DRV that do not have the RAID setup. All my drives are around 70% and if I go over that size the system becomes unbearable slow.

If it is just the drive seek time a reboot would not fix the issue for a short time.

My guess is memory buffer allocation issues due to more memory buffer usage.

Edited by RussBarr, 12 December 2012 - 11:45 AM.


#12 OFFLINE   Richierich

Richierich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 8,479 posts
Joined: Jan 10, 2008

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:50 PM

My guess is memory buffer allocation issues due to more memory buffer usage.


I have 2 TB WD Hard Drives with 32 Mb of Cache so maybe that is why mine operate so Fast!!!

Having a Larger Cache Buffer Area cuts down on the amount of Data Paging which is the Slowest or Longest Process for a CPU to Perform.
*
DIRECTV CUSTOMER SINCE 1997
Here's My Setup

#13 OFFLINE   MadDVRDude

MadDVRDude

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 1 posts
  • LocationMidwest
Joined: Sep 21, 2014

Posted 21 September 2014 - 10:10 PM

I know its an old topic, but have some interesting news.  I just happened to have a 24 TB RAID Box, and before putting it to its intended purpose I tried connecting it to my HR-44. It recognized it, but when it attempted to format the array it failed.  I dropped it down to 12 TB and it worked just fine.  So there is a limit!



#14 OFFLINE   yosoyellobo

yosoyellobo

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,984 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2006

Posted 21 September 2014 - 10:15 PM

Out

I know its an old topic, but have some interesting news.  I just happened to have a 24 TB RAID Box, and before putting it to its intended purpose I tried connecting it to my HR-44. It recognized it, but when it attempted to format the array it failed.  I dropped it down to 12 TB and it worked just fine.  So there is a limit!


Out of curiosity how do have the drive configure?

#15 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 20,058 posts
  • LocationMediterranean Sea
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 22 September 2014 - 12:43 AM

I know its an old topic, but have some interesting news.  I just happened to have a 24 TB RAID Box, and before putting it to its intended purpose I tried connecting it to my HR-44. It recognized it, but when it attempted to format the array it failed.  I dropped it down to 12 TB and it worked just fine.  So there is a limit!

could be 20 or 18 or 16 or 14 TB ... not conclusive report



#16 OFFLINE   Kevin L

Kevin L

    AllStar

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 97 posts
  • LocationSouthwest Florida
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 30 September 2014 - 08:34 AM

I have a 6TB array (four 2TB drives) on an HR-44. Towards the end of the network television season, I am probably about 60% to 70% full. I use all this space because I record full seasons of shows before binge-watching a series at the end of the season. I also record new series that may interest me, but I do not want to watch if it's not going to be renewed. If it's cancelled or non-renewed, I delete the already recorded shows and cancel the series link. That frees up a lot of space by May, since networks do not hang with low-performing shows like in the past.  

 

I also have a TiVo Roamio Pro with an internal 3TB drive that I use a backup for shows I don't want to lose with DirecTV's single point of failure. That may become less important as more shows can be streamed, but I still prefer watching from the DVR rather than streaming. Should DirecTV ever allow us to move drives within an account, I may be able to retire the TiVo.

 

I do notice slowdowns on the HR-44 as it fills. During primetime especially, as at least 3-4 tuners are recording and we're watching a recorded show. Now, with the new season here, I have about 90 SLs, so it's nearing its limit. Even when the TiVo is 90% full, it's still much quicker than the HR44.

 

Kevin



#17 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 20,058 posts
  • LocationMediterranean Sea
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 30 September 2014 - 09:40 AM

Kevin, why not expand your array ? Someone found its max size - 12 TB.



#18 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,069 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 30 September 2014 - 10:57 AM

I have a 6TB array (four 2TB drives) on an HR-44. Towards the end of the network television season, I am probably about 60% to 70% full. I use all this space because I record full seasons of shows before binge-watching a series at the end of the season. I also record new series that may interest me, but I do not want to watch if it's not going to be renewed. If it's cancelled or non-renewed, I delete the already recorded shows and cancel the series link. That frees up a lot of space by May, since networks do not hang with low-performing shows like in the past.  

 

I also have a TiVo Roamio Pro with an internal 3TB drive that I use a backup for shows I don't want to lose with DirecTV's single point of failure. That may become less important as more shows can be streamed, but I still prefer watching from the DVR rather than streaming. Should DirecTV ever allow us to move drives within an account, I may be able to retire the TiVo.

 

I do notice slowdowns on the HR-44 as it fills. During primetime especially, as at least 3-4 tuners are recording and we're watching a recorded show. Now, with the new season here, I have about 90 SLs, so it's nearing its limit. Even when the TiVo is 90% full, it's still much quicker than the HR44.

 

Kevin

 

 

I do exactly the same as you, same size raid array too, by recording entire seasons of new shows before watching them and delete if they aren't renewed or are cancelled.   I haven't noticed slowdowns on my HR44 though. 


THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#19 OFFLINE   RunnerFL

RunnerFL

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,069 posts
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

Posted 30 September 2014 - 10:59 AM

Kevin, why not expand your array ? Someone found its max size - 12 TB.

 

Not "max size" at all.  I had it up to 16TB in testing. 

 

And as far as his choice to only use 6TB, it's his choice.  I went down to 6TB because I never saw myself using all that and I wanted to use the other drives I tested with elsewhere.


THIS SPACE FOR RENT

#20 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 20,058 posts
  • LocationMediterranean Sea
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 30 September 2014 - 11:29 AM

see post#13






Protected By... spam firewall...And...