agreed - i voiced that as well - Short of saying as much in that 10 minute convo at CEDIA and this forum are the only ways I know of getting that as a feature added as a voice of the customer. There are other active users in this space that have YouTube platforms that may vocalize it. Hoping to go on BrightSide Theater audio podcast soon and this will definitely be a point of reference/topic as he's an active member of that community and post weekly about KScape content and the like. Doing what I can for a much desired feature!
-
Thanks for visiting the Kaleidescape Owners' Forum
This forum is for the community of Kaleidescape owners, and others interested in learning about the system, equipment, services, and the company itself.It is run by a group of enthusiastic Kaleidescape owners and dealers purely as a service to this community.
This board is not affiliated in any way with Kaleidescape, Inc.
For official technical support, product information, or customer service, please visit www.kaleidescape.com -
You are currently in "Guest" mode and not logged in with a registered account.
The forum is free to use and most of the forum can be used by guests who are not registered....
... but we strongly encourage you to register for a full account. There is no cost to register for a full account.
Benefits of registering for a full account:
- Participate in the discussions! You must have a registered account to make posts on the forums. You will be able to start your own thread on a topic or question, or you can reply to other threads/discussions.
- Use the "Conversation" feature (known as "private messaging" on other forums) to communicate directly with any of the other users here.
- Access the Files area. The "resources" area of the forum contains many "Favorite Scene" and Script files that can dramatically increase the enjoyment of your Kaleidescape system. Go directly to great scenes in your favorite movies, created by other owners, and add automation to playback of your system with Scripts.
- You won't see this annoying notice at the top of every screen!😊
New Kscape Products
- Thread starter Sasquatch
- Start date
I have not seen anything posted that indicates that the SSD and HDD servers cannot be mixed, but I do not have an SSD server in my setup to guarantee my answer.
Yes, SSD & HDD servers can be mixed in a single system.
However, mixed SSD & HDD systems will not perform at SSD speed. Downloads that go to the HDD servers will be slower than those that go to the SSD servers.
And don't forget that too many servers will slow your system down (because of increased server-to-server communications to maintain data synchronization) ... you don't want more than four servers in a single system.
However, mixed SSD & HDD systems will not perform at SSD speed. Downloads that go to the HDD servers will be slower than those that go to the SSD servers.
And don't forget that too many servers will slow your system down (because of increased server-to-server communications to maintain data synchronization) ... you don't want more than four servers in a single system.
What´s the recommendation if you exceed that?
Hi Tay!
Could you please post the decreases in function, as additional servers/players and types of servers are added to, say an 8Tb terra compact prime SSD and one new start C player system, please?
I had previously thought that I would wait a year or so, before buying a second 8Tb, vs. one larger server, or whatever the minimum storage server and possibly player, to provide a staggered backup system, in my use case. I could use more players as well, so.... a chart illustrating decreases as requested above, would be most useful.
Thank you very much
FURY
OK, that was my first thought, thanks.
What about splitting a system into subsystems?
This Support article may be useful and provide some extra information about the server and component limits:
Hi J!
That is helpful, but the excerpt from that article here:
"A Kaleidescape system with too many servers will display a warning at the top of all browser interface pages that the recommended system size has been exceeded and performance may suffer. If no performance concerns are observed, then no immediate actions need to be taken. However, it is worth noting that such a system may begin to develop slower performance in the future as the movie library grows."
seems to indicate that the SSD servers are significantly more capable, as defined it issues that might occur as K is added, but the biggest wild card is the "...as the movie library grows." It would be great to know when the library size, for example, bottlenecks the entire system and, for example, if the downloaded content is the most significant parameter, or the"my Movies" count supervenes. If the former, then the staggered, warranty servers of say, 22Tb capacity would offer some advantages over a 48Tb server of equal build, etc..
Thank you very much
FURY
Without getting too deep into technical specifics, Kaleidescape servers have databases and background processes that are run in order to maintain and serve up your movie library. Things like movie guide updates (the metadata about all of the movies on your system), library updates (what collections you have created, what movies are in which collection(s), what movies have been played, what movies have been paused (and where), downloading content, etc. are just a few examples of data that has to be updated and the processes being run.
This has to happen on each and every server that is part of your Kaleidescape system. In turn, those updates also need to be synced between every server in the system. As the number of servers in the system increases, so does the complexity of keeping the information on all of those servers in sync. In addition to this added complexity of syncing information, as the number of titles in your library grows, the amount of time it takes to process various background tasks begins to take longer.
So in your example above, a system comprised of a single 48 TB server would be more performant than a system comprised of two 22 TB servers (although you're still under the 4 server limit at this point so the performance difference would be negligible). It's true that the 48 TB server might encounter some performance hits as the library grows but the two server system would encounter those performance hits sooner since there are added processes running in order to keep the two servers' in sync.
Then you have to factor in the performance differences between server types. The Terra or Terra Prime has more processing power than a Strato and the Terra doesn't have to support video and audio codecs, manage a user interface, or actually play content. So when one of the servers in your system is actually a Strato or Alto, you've already introduced a system performance bottleneck since the background processes on the Strato are slower (both because of less processing power _and_ because first and foremost, the Strato needs to be able to play video so things like guide update processing or movie downloads have to take a backseat to actually playing video).
As for the Terra Prime SSDs, they are currently the most performant servers in the Terra line up. In addition to the improved processing power of the Terra Prime, they have the benefit of the faster (and more consistent) data read and write speeds of the SSDs. Whereas the read and write speeds on a HDD are quite dependent on where on the disc platter the data is located, there is no such performance penalty when accessing an SSD. This is what enables those servers to be able to serve 25 simultaneous playback zones as compared to the 10 supported by Terra's with HDDs in them and allows the faster download speeds.
Slightly off topic but perhaps good timing to ask while on this matter, have you experimented with different networking topologies for the best performance for multiple servers and players within a system (While staying within the 4 server recommendation)?
Is there any benefits in using VLANs dedicated for the Kaleidescape equipment? Possibly keeping the Kaleidescape traffic isolated from the rest of the chatty clutter?
How about a dedicated switch? For example, 2 Terra Prime servers and 5 Strato C players on an 8 port 2.5 Gbe layer 2/3 switch (2.5 Gbe uplink). Would this make a positive impact on how snappy the UI is and maybe the movies start slightly quicker once selected?
How about for Co-Star systems? Would you keep both Terra Prime/Strato C and Premiere equipment on the same switch? Technically, only the Terra Prime servers and the uplink needs to be 2.5Gbe. Having all ports, 2.5Gbe is an overkill. Going by the above example of 2 Terra Prime servers and 5 Strato C players, let’s add a Premiere 1U+ and 5 M300 players with Co-Star on each. Would you recommend a single 14+ port 2.5Gbe switch OR an 8 port 2.5Gbe switch for the Terra Prime /Strato C equipment and an 8 port gigabit switch for the Premiere equipment?
Note: Maybe my 5 zone example isn’t complex enough to see any benefits in dedicated networking. Perhaps 4 servers and 10 zones is when more attention to networking is needed?
Let me preface this response by saying that I am not a networking expert by any stretch of the imagination. What I can say is that on a properly configured and functioning network, separating the Kaleidescape gear onto its own VLAN or onto separate switches is largely unnecessary unless you are putting together a system with a large number of playback zones (10+) or the network environment as a whole is already complex with a lot of other devices generating a large amount of traffic.
You don't need to have 2.5 Gbe support on every port on every switch in your network (the Strato Cs can only do 1.0 Gbe anyway) as long as the switch's uplink supports the higher speed. Where you're going to see the benefit of the higher network speed of the Terra Prime is on movie downloads -- so the entire path between the Terra Prime and your Internet gateway device must support 2.5 Gbe or higher speeds -- and when serving a high number (10+) of concurrent movie playback sessions.
Aside from dropped packets or other network misconfigurations, the network topology has very little influence on the "snappiness" of the UI. UI slowdowns on large systems are more likely to be caused by the increasing amount of background activities bogging down the system as it maintains the synchronization and performs various background update and maintenance tasks amongst the servers in the system.
As for your Co-Star scenario, whether you put the Premiere gear on the same switch or connect it to a separate Gigabit switch would make no appreciable difference in my opinion.