Will This VMS Work With IT Provided SAN?

Hi All;

The fact - more and more IT Companies are involved in Security systems. They are coming in as an adviser, or lately, again more and more as SI’s, trying to get direct contacts with manufacturers to get direct deals with the investors.

Beside that, they force their own Hardware – Server and Storage. A lot of time the investor/end-user has brand-named equipment for the whole IT equipment, with maintenance contracts, service contracts… And some parts of the Server/storage equipment are already in place at the investor – working 24/7 – two-side trust already gained…

In one situation we came to a project with 150 cameras where the IT Integrator got the main contract -- forcing their own HW. We are not concerned about the Server selection but on the Storage side we are a little bit suspicious. They want to use an iSCSI Storage.

I do not know the vendor of the storage – but here some of the tech data:

Connection : SAN

RAID type : RAID5

Member disk : 6+2

Disk type : SAS

Disk size : 3.5inch

Disk capacity : 2-4TB

Disk speed : 7,200rpm

Access type : Sequential

Block size : 128 KB

Host I/F : iSCSI 1G

Performance of 1RAID : 220 MB/s

Performance of estimated configuration with 2 controllers: 464 MB/s ( 2 MB/s / TB )

Number of Disk : 72 disks, 192,26 TB

The IP Video System itself – server/client:

150pcs of H.264 cameras with 6Mbit/sec maximum each – fixed – makes 1200Mb/sec.

Divided on 3 Servers. Server with XEON inside, OS on SSD; Recording/Viewing divided through double NIC cards;

Each server connected with a 2x1Gb iSCSI (network) connection.

1 Remote Viewing Client – always connected - 4 Monitors FullHD (using Secondary stream) – showing max.40 cams with a secondary stream; some kind of "small" VideoWall;

1 Remote Client – always connected – 16cams on a FullHD monitor max., again, secondary stream.

1 Remote client – through a web client; occasionally.

So, nothing special on the viewing side;

The IT company swears on this – saying, that it will work 100%;

Maybe some smaller delays in getting the initial client-stream from the server. The investor is ok with this delay.

Maybe I miss something – let me please know if You have done something similar – every hint/idea is really welcome.

Thx in advance for any shared info!

Login to read this IPVM discussion.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

**'** **** ***** ***** ******* **** ******* ***** **** *** years *** - ********* ** ******** ******, **'* ********* **** Enhance, ****, ** *******, *** *** ** **** ******* *** same ***: ****** ***** *** ** *** ****, ******* *** DVR's ***** ********* ** **, *** *** *** ******* ** Windows' **** ********** **** **** *** ***** ******** **** ***** would.

****** * ******, ****** **, **** ** * ***** ******, and ***** **** ** **** ** ** ***** ** ******** drive. ** **** *****, *** ********* **** ** *** ***, while *** ******** **** *****(*) **/*** ********** ** "******" *****(*), used **** ** *** *** **** *******.

*** **** *** ****** ** ******* (*** ** ****** *** MP) ** *** ***** **-******* ****** ********, **** ********* ** its *** *** ** * ****** ******* ********; **** ************* is ** * *** ******, *****+*****, *** * ***** ** about **** *********, *** **** ********* ** **** ***. **'** had ** *********** ****** **** ****, *** ** ******/******** ****** that ****** *** **** ********** ** (**** ** ***** ****, it ***** ** ****** ** ***** **** ** *** ***).