Return-Path: Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4717943 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 18 May 2012 04:09:59 +0200 Received: by pbbrp2 with SMTP id rp2so3192051pbb.28 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 19:11:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; bh=qD68h+pVzzgPJ+HbPa5sNJ7xsO8VjD1SleQWtWlX4T0=; b=F4smGVU+rn77L1SJaAI5OAHEpBmH/f3QD/hMTTvG0CS5Xg+2hlnsXlQgt/v/og5IWd MLtEP1bj1zA7aXlsVuwWeUMPb4hdyTEtC45bftcD0p4Kd2r4hyoiPrRYdNFTZp2Dwstd 4LP6p4lKOkQtrqzb+Lhw8sMw+sgj1wahmBlljg2dh/jWVu7yAmRuOYzxV2TYpV83YvEZ tf5525J4KeiWxDASpmrUl/QR1pIge0ZLH50lyQZ48PU8As0p8OyLbWRp9ax1jjYmeLOM X0poSktXlq9yY/Yrgj3DTw3nSUV55wQZ3AeRq5YNpd2qD85ahSZEseSGol9JxBnmgsXb 82NQ== Received: by 10.68.232.135 with SMTP id to7mr32968659pbc.143.1337307109392; Thu, 17 May 2012 19:11:49 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.10.102] (c-98-246-188-32.hsd1.or.comcast.net. [98.246.188.32]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id nd6sm11027370pbc.63.2012.05.17.19.11.46 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 17 May 2012 19:11:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FB5AFDA.90309@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 19:11:38 -0700 From: Robert Houghton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: After Effects Mail List Subject: Re: [AE] Clear disk cache based on a project ? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080708030904020401050201" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080708030904020401050201 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit So what would be the ideal arrangement for CS6 then if there were 2 7200rpm drives and one 120GB SSD? SSD System disc/Cache 2x 7200 HDD Raid 0 for Media? or 7200 HDD for System SSD all by itself for cache 7200 HDD for media? Or would it be worth it to buy a fourth drive (either SSD or 7200rpm drive) The former for System and the latter for striping with the other 7200rpm drive for media? -Rob ------------------- Robert Houghton Houghton Media Motion Graphics, Compositing, Animation www.houghtonmedia.com On 5/17/2012 5:41 PM, Brian Higgins wrote: > Agreed. You might be able to scrub around a little more smoothly, but > I'd skip it unless you're doing stereo 4K work or something similarly > bandwidth intensive. > > -bH > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Dan Ramirez > wrote: > > A single 6g SSD is orders of magnitude faster than a comparable > 7200rpm drive. I'd skip RAID, but I tend to avoid complexity when > I can. > > On May 17, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Carey Dissmore > wrote: > > > I'm starting to spec out a new machine and an SSD for the cache > is definitely in order. It'll be 6G SATA-connected at minimum, but > I'm actually considering perhaps RAID-0 stripe of two 6G SSD's to > improve performance and reduce latency all-the-more. Anyone have > any thoughts on how much of a difference that would make in AE? > Worth doing? Assume fully modern mobo/chipset machine. > > > > carey > > > > On May 17, 2012, at 1:13 PM, Rendernyc wrote: > > > >> You can set your disk cache to a folder for each project but > would have to change this manually when u switch projects in the > prefs. > >> > >> The cache will clear itself out when it starts getting full > based on age > >> > >> Just remember the cache files aren't project dependent. If you > have a comp that is cached in multiple aep's it uses the single > cached frames for all. > >> > >> On May 17, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Michael Malone > wrote: > >> > >>> The new persistent disk cache is super awesome and will only > get better when I get a dedicated SSD. One thing that would make > it even better is the ability to clear the cache based on a > particular project. I'm always juggling several projects at once > and when I finish one I would like to clear the cache of that project. > >>> > >>> Although, I guess it isn't that important as the old stuff > will get flushed as new stuff happens. Still might be handy. I > wonder if that kind of thing is scriptable? > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> +---End of message---+ > >>> To unsubscribe send any message to > > > >> > >> +---End of message---+ > >> To unsubscribe send any message to > > > > > > > +---End of message---+ > > To unsubscribe send any message to > > > +---End of message---+ > To unsubscribe send any message to > > > > > > -- > brian higgins | senior vfx artist > Sol Design > 312.706.5500 > higgins@soldesignfx.com > soldesignfx.com > > > --------------080708030904020401050201 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit So what would be the ideal arrangement for CS6 then if there were 2 7200rpm drives and one 120GB SSD?

SSD System disc/Cache
2x 7200 HDD Raid 0 for Media?

or

7200 HDD for System
SSD all by itself for cache
7200 HDD for media?

Or would it be worth it to buy a fourth drive (either SSD or 7200rpm drive) The former for System and the latter for striping with the other 7200rpm drive for media?

    -Rob
 
-------------------
Robert Houghton
Houghton Media
Motion Graphics, Compositing, Animation
www.houghtonmedia.com

On 5/17/2012 5:41 PM, Brian Higgins wrote:
Agreed.  You might be able to scrub around a little more smoothly, but I'd skip it unless you're doing stereo 4K work or something similarly bandwidth intensive.  

-bH

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Dan Ramirez <ramirezdan@gmail.com> wrote:
A single 6g SSD is orders of magnitude faster than a comparable 7200rpm drive. I'd skip RAID, but I tend to avoid complexity when I can.

On May 17, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Carey Dissmore <carey@imugonline.com> wrote:

> I'm starting to spec out a new machine and an SSD for the cache is definitely in order. It'll be 6G SATA-connected at minimum, but I'm actually considering perhaps RAID-0 stripe of two 6G SSD's to improve performance and reduce latency all-the-more. Anyone have any thoughts on how much of a difference that would make in AE? Worth doing? Assume fully modern mobo/chipset machine.
>
> carey
>
> On May 17, 2012, at 1:13 PM, Rendernyc wrote:
>
>> You can set your disk cache to a folder for each project but would have to change this manually when u switch projects in the prefs.
>>
>> The cache will clear itself out when it starts getting full based on age
>>
>> Just remember the cache files aren't project dependent. If you have a comp that is cached in multiple aep's it uses the single cached frames for all.
>>
>> On May 17, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Michael Malone <mmalone@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The new persistent disk cache is super awesome and will only get better when I get a dedicated SSD. One thing that would make it even better is the ability to clear the cache based on a particular project. I'm always juggling several projects at once and when I finish one I would like to clear the cache of that project.
>>>
>>> Although, I guess it isn't that important as the old stuff will get flushed as new stuff happens. Still might be handy. I wonder if that kind of thing is scriptable?
>>>
>>> mike
>>>
>>> +---End of message---+
>>> To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>
>>
>> +---End of message---+
>> To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>
>
>
> +---End of message---+
> To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>

+---End of message---+
To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>



--
brian higgins | senior vfx artist
Sol  Design



--------------080708030904020401050201--