Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Dolby DSS220/pricing

This is topic Dolby DSS220/pricing in forum Digital Cinema Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000867

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-21-2011, 07:29 PM:

Dolby just introduced the DSS220 server for use with series-II projector-integrated Media Blocks. This is a similar product as Doremis ShowVault.

What's interesting is that the new Dolby pricelist quotes this server, which consequently lacks an internal media block, at less than half the list price of the DSS200:

http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/Assets/US/Doc/Professional/Dolby_Cinema_Products_Price_List.pdf

That pricelist also has prices for DSS200 spare parts - the DSS200 CT862 media block e.g. is quoted at 8.800US$

Has anyone seen target prices for series-II IMBs?

- Carsten

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-21-2011, 09:04 PM:

Does Dolby actually have a working IMB yet or are they reccomending third party units. This seems to be somewhat common.

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-21-2011, 09:14 PM:

Hold on sir speedy. The DSS220 is not out yet...note the price sheet shows as a "preliminary" price.

Dolby, to the best of my knowledge, is NOT manufacturing an IMB. They will be selling one with their badge on it but it likely is not made by them (but I would bet they had input into its design). USL is also making a Dolby compatible IMB. Clint may know what its status is.

Both the DSS200 and the DSS220 will work with such an IMB. Note there are differences between the 200 and 220 beyond the IMB thing. I think the DSS220 is only a 3-drive system, the DSS200 is a 4-drive system...the DSS220 gets its storage size by using larger drives (2TB or 3TB vs the DSS200's 1TB).

-Steve

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-21-2011, 10:25 PM:

3 drive = bad. Stick with the DSS200.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-21-2011, 10:46 PM:

To be honest the three drive thing doesn't bother me a bit and has shown better reliability. I've actually had way more failures in hardware driven four drive RAID systems than in any other type. This goes for both D-Cinema and Enterprise servers(SATA based). Nothng beats a SCSI drive for reliability... not even SAS! One thing I attribute more failures to is that hardware RAID SATA based systems seem to keep the drives working constantly, even when the player is stopped. The software raid units are also generally easier to deal with when it comes to adding, importing or rebuilding a RAID, especially under Linux. I've seen one broken software driven RAID still do 250 mbps transfer with a drie physically removed and it could still ingest AND play back at the same time. Software RAID has advanced in giant strides for sure! Sure you can say Dolby put the RAID rebuild function out front... but there is a dam good reason they did! Accessing and setting up some hardware based RAID cards for the average booth person can be a convoluted experience at best. The UI in many is seemingly written by programmers only for other programmers to understand!!

As to the IMB cards there are just a few really good third party and only one I know for sure that is FIPS APPROVED. At least one IMB also offers two HDMI inputs but is only available in Europe so far. Jack has been workng on a JPEG 2000 card for a long, long time and I look forword to what USL finally has to offer.... but I do hope it also has some other form of input, either HDMI or DVI or you'll also be getting a standard inout card as well!! Most IMB cards should allow the use of literally any server (even Enterprise type) with appropriate software and GUI and it cold be via eSATA or fiber link. IMB software is always seperate and loaded seperate. Having other easily accessable IMB options would be very nice as it is the only sure route to 4K...

Mark

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-22-2011, 06:32 AM:

Well, if Dolby would not be able to meet that price target, they would not have put that price up in the first place. I'm not talking +/- a few hundred bucks. I'm talking half the price of a DSS200.

The question is: With possible 4k DLP upgrades, higher framerate plans, etc. in the making, would it be advisable already now to go the 'dumb' server + IMB path if that combo doesn't cost more (or even less) than a classic server with internal IMB?

- Carsten

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-22-2011, 08:30 AM:

I also have to wonder if that price includes IMB which is typically 3 to 5 k USD by itself. If it does it's got to be very basic IMB card. But at a minimum should allow 12 bit color for 3-D. You can bet they will charge extra for 4k firmware upgrade if it is able to do 4k.

Mark

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-22-2011, 08:45 AM:

No, IMB is not included in the DSS220 price.

If you say 3-5k for IMB, then a combo solution currently seems to offer more future options at a lower price. Does anyone know wether Doremis Showvault is in the same ballpark as the 8500US$ for the DSS220?

Only slight risk is that the IMB combinations are fairly new and might have some quirks to be solved.

- Carsten

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-22-2011, 10:06 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
To be honest the three drive thing doesn't bother me a bit and has shown better reliability. I've actually had way more failures in hardware driven four drive RAID systems than in any other type.

Absolutely the exact opposite in every respect is what I have seen. I think you would be hard pressed to get IT specialists to agree with you as well.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-24-2011, 08:50 AM:

Brad,

That is absolutely true if you are constantly reading AND writing to the disk. In our case however we are only reading 95% of the time and the data is secure enough for our D-Cinema application because all the data still exists on DCP's stored on site and in an LMS in many cases during a run. If a raid in say a GDC completely fails there is always live play right off the DCP because the OS resides elsewhere. In a critical enterprise situation they wouldn't even trust a RAID 6 because of a possible RAID card failure. Their data is always backed up at very regular intervals to some other secure site.

Mark

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-24-2011, 01:43 PM:

To use your example, there is a far better chance for a GDC to fail due to a non-raided OS drive. ALL hard drives fail and there is no backup whatsoever on a GDC. It doesn't matter if the 3 drive raid fails or not when that one lonely OS drive dies.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-24-2011, 02:51 PM:

I am not familiar with the Dolby products discussed here. I am, however, familiar with storage technologies, RAID levels, etc. (My day job is in the IT industry.)

The Dolby web site says that both units use RAID5. A RAID5 array can tolerate the failure of one disk in the array before data loss occurs. Given that, and with all other factors being equal, a 3-disk array will have a lower risk of data loss than a 4-disk array because the chances of a single disk failure increase as the number of disks increases. However, if the 4-disk unit is configured with 3 disks in the array and with the fourth disk as a hot spare (is this even possible with the hardware in question?), then it would be preferable to the 3-disk unit because the array would be able to rebuild itself after a failure without human intervention, which would lessen the chance of a second failure occurring while the array is in a degraded state.

That said, a 4-disk RAID5 array will, all other factors being equal, provide better I/O performance than an equivalent 3-disk array. For this application, I am not sure that performance matters much once a particular threshold (the ability to read a movie file without risk of interruption in the worst possible case where the RAID array needs to be rebuilt at the same time) is reached. In general, RAID5 performance is not very good, but, again, we may not care in this case.

I will add the usual disclaimer that RAID is not backup. RAID exists to provide improved performance and reduced downtime in the event of hardware failure. It does not replace regular backups to tape or some other medium that can be taken off-site and stored. Again, this is not likely an issue for this application, but it still needs to be said.

Brad--there is really a D-cinema server that has a nonredundant OS disk? That's insane. This is 2011. Disks are cheap.

Edit: in general, software-based RAID5 is not safe. In the case of a power failure during a write operation, the array can be left in an inconsistent state. This is why hardware RAID controllers have battery-backed memory to cache all write operations.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-24-2011, 04:16 PM:

Brad...

Loosing the OS disk is no big deal. You can boot from a USB OS drive just like the Doremi can...

Scott...
D-Cinema servers as of yet have not used a hot spare RAID setup. Although the card in the original Dolby DSS-100 can be set up to do it! As that unit originally came it was but 1.2 TB of storage and they probably needed that extra drive more for storage space increase. The IBM server being used in a major VPF program has a hard disk array attached to it that is on average 12 terrabytes. It does have one global hot spare available that can be swapped in and quite easily by using the cinterface card's built in web browser. You are also correct about the efficiency factor. Once you are able to sustain a certain read speed... which is all that really matters here then all is well. That read speed in the server I mention which is software RAID based did not suffer at all from the loss of a drive. Most hardware based RAIDs I have worked with seriously degrade on read speed if a drive is lost and the write speed goes to the dogs! In fact we were still able to play back AND ingest with the degraded RAID. Remember that 95% of the time here we are just reading back data to play a movie... so no hardware based RAID is really needed and hence no RAID battery nor worry about loosing write back data. I just lost the battery in one of my Dell 2950's and decided to replace both since they are the same age. They are just over 5 years old...

IMHO I believe that ALL servers should offer RAID 1 for the OS and keep the OS seperate from media storage. A high quality SSD will also increase reliability dramatically on a single drive based OS for a price. If the storage RAID fails for what ever reason there is still "live play" and no show interruption at all. If one knew the GDC well enough you could loose both the OS drive and RAID and boot from USB and still use live play!

Mark

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-24-2011, 04:49 PM:

If I were designing these things, I would probably go with a mirrored pair of disks for the OS+swap and a separate mirrored pair of 3TB disks for the movie files. At least under Linux, software RAID is fine for this, and 3TB of space would probably be enough for the majority of cinemas (how many movies would one normally want to keep on the server, anyway?).

Does anyone make use of the predictive failure SMART information from the hard disks?

I'm really surprised that any of this is even an issue. Even top-quality SAS disks are cheap and getting the storage stuff right would add almost no cost to the server while significantly increasing reliability.

As for SSDs, there is no real benefit to using them in this application. They are not more reliable than mechanical disks and should not be used for swap space due to the limited number of write cycles. They would be a win for performance, but that is a nonissue here.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-24-2011, 08:23 PM:

Mark, I'm not concerned about the 95%. I am concerned about the 5%. That last 5% is called uptime.

Scott, I've seen all of the 3 drive raid servers skip and stutter during playback when other things are going on such as pushing/pulling content. Your comment on I/O performance is right on the money. Again, uptime.

Scott, as an IT professional for your server would you rather have:
OPTION #1 4 drive hardware-based raid with OS on it.
OPTION #2 3 drive software-based raid with separate non-raid OS SATA drive.

Mark, the one thing I do agree with you is that in an ideal world the OS would be on a 2 drive raid1. However nobody has done that and until somebody does, the 4 drive raid with OS on it is the most reliable. Never forget that 5% because those are paying customers that may never return. Being concerned about that 5% of the time when a server is having to do other things is the proper way to select a server. You don't spec lamphouses to barely meet light levels based upon a brand new screen with no port glass and the first 2 hours of a bulb's life do you???

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-24-2011, 09:11 PM:

No Brad... the other 5% of the time we are ingesting media into the RAID. Not having down time!! 95% of the time is is reading back only.

Mark

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-24-2011, 09:18 PM:

Brad--there are too many factors involved to make a definitive statement, but a server that has any non-redundant storage is a total non-starter for me. The concept is laughable. The only way I could see this working is if it had some alternative way to boot in the event that the OS disk failed (e.g. in a multiplex it could be configured to boot off of the network by means of another server).

I'm really amazed that we are even discussing stuff like this. I would have hoped that the manufacturers would have figured it out years ago. They aren't building desktop computers for Aunt Millie to surf the web and send email. They are building systems that businesses will depend upon in order to serve their customers. If (when) the server fails, money is lost. And, as I understand it, the current key distribution system makes it difficult or impossible for a paranoid theatre owner to keep a spare server on hand to be swapped out in case of failure.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-25-2011, 12:01 AM:

Mark, you keep missing my point. That 5% you speak of is when the disk read/write is getting its workout. That is when the 3 drive raid isn't as efficient. That is the only time I have ever seen playback problems. I am concerned with one thing, uptime!

We can debate this until your fingers fall off, but the fact remains 3 drive raids are NOT as solid as 4 drive raids. Software raids are also NOT as solid as hardware raids. Any server with only one non-raided OS drive is built to fail. There it is, I said it. It may not fail for a few years, but every SATA drive dies. Since it's pretty obvious we are speaking of GDC, they told me when that drive dies the server is down, as it stores critical media block info on it. This was as recent as a month or two ago. Has something changed VERY recently? I spoke with them about raid'ing that OS drive and adding a 4th drive to their content raid and they are working on that (as well as other things) in a future server release...which is a thumbs up to GDC once it happens.

Keep in mind I'm also not targeting GDC. Doremi has 2 models, the DCP2000 and DCP2K4. I would not recommend anyone buy the DCP2000 because of that 3 drive raid. (All of Doremi's servers are software raid like GDC, so that isn't an option.) However Doremi's DCP2K4 unit has a 4 drive raid. That's the one to get. At that point the only thing you are stuck with is when those flash chips die. I have seen a 25% failure rate. Still though that is better than the guaranteed 100% failure rate of a GDC when the OS SATA drive dies.

I'm not letting Dolby off easy here either though. Dolby is about to introduce 2 new models for IMBs. One has that silly 3 drive raid in it, the other I believe is a 5 drive raid. You won't find me saying anything nice about their 3 drive raid model, so don't think for a second this is a brand issue. This is a hardware, design and performance issue.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-25-2011, 03:57 AM:

There was a time when Doremi had an issue with a single type of flash disk, and they went over to a different type. Now with the USB backup/restore mechanism, they are the easiest to get back on line.

If there was a 25% failure rate, they would be out of the business already.

There might be a difference between smaller houses with local technicians and larger plexes with NOC. It seems obvious that Dolby has a history of many failed drives, but a failed drive doesn't mean downtime if managed properly.

I really don't see a difference between hardware and software raids nowadys - technically, this difference doesn't exist. Hardware raid is software as well, and battery buffering is only used on a small part of dedicated controllers - could be solved by a server USV just as well, and raid controller buffering doesn't mean a file system is consistent after a power failure - the file system is still runnng on the OS, not the RAID controller.

That said, Sony currently is the only one with dual-drive redundancy (RAID6).

To me, the Doremi 2k4 approach with a write protected Flash and a 3+1 RAID seems favourable. RAID controllers need to be second sourced, it could be very complicated nowadays to ensure supply in the long run, since product cycles are so short. I always try to avoid to be dependant on a specialized piece of hardware.
You can always move a software RAID to a different machine if it uses open block building/standard parameters.

- Carsten

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-25-2011, 05:12 AM:

Software RAID is fine for simple mirroring and/or striping, but a software-based RAID5 is not safe. Hardware RAID5 controllers without batteries or NVRAM are also not safe. An unclean shutdown at the wrong time will kill either of these.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-25-2011, 11:59 AM:

That's why most servers run on USVs. Battery buffering does not prevent a non-graceful shutdown - it only prevents loss of data in the buffer. Wether that helps the OS on restart, is open...

I doubt that the DSS200 contoller has battery buffering.

- Carsten

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-25-2011, 01:12 PM:

Stupid question: what would typically be done for a major D-cinema show. By this, I mean a premiere at Radio City or some similar event where failure would literally not be an option.

Would they have two separate servers, two separate projectors, and two separate decryption keys?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-25-2011, 01:13 PM:

The Dolby DSL100 (LMS) is RAID-6. As for Dolby drive failures...there was definitely a bad section of them...Segates...our earliest units seem to have been chugging along and our units with 1TB drives seem to have no problems. I want to say all of the drive failures in Dolby's have had have been Segates...the Hitatchi drives seem to not be as failure prone.

Note on the Dolby DSS200, it will self-rebuild the Raid too if you are software 4.2.1 or beyond (it might have done it on earlier version 4 software but would trying to get to at least 4.2.1.3 since Dolby offered it free of charge to ALL players, including the 100s.

-Steve

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 08-25-2011, 02:34 PM:

I had a DSL 100 library crash completely last week in a 10 plex I sold.

Today, a dead show store, maybe the third out of a total of 10 at this location.

The fun never stops in D Cinema land. The support is always superb, but way too much trouble.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-25-2011, 04:33 PM:

quote: Carsten Kurz
If there was a 25% failure rate, they would be out of the business already.

Carsten, I said I have had a 25% failure rate in that context. Others may have a 1% failure rate of 50% for all I know. I cannot speak for others.

Posted by Terrence Meiczinger (Member # 5059) on 08-26-2011, 01:09 AM:

I'm probably missing something, but why would a 3 drive RAID suck and a 5 drive RAID array necessarily be better?

If it is RAID 5, regardless of the number of drives, the array can only withstand one drive failure. Increasing the number of drives in a RAID 5 mathematically increases the array failure rate. Now, if the individual drives are larger in the 3 drive array to achieve the same storage, that could cause a slight disadvantage because it will take longer to rebuild increasing the window of a second failure. As for read performance, there is some gain (depending on the data access) from more drives in a healthy array, but in a degraded state, the more drives the slower it will be since it has to read the parity data off each drive. In this case, the minimum of 3 drives would yield the best performance.

If the 5 drive system was RAID 6, then sure, it would have the added advantage of being able to survive two drive failures. However, the performance degradation of RAID 6, especially when writing can be brutal. You want the added safety on your show library, but it probably isn't worth it on the digital server. The better solution would be a nested array, such as 1+0.

Posted by Robert Keeney (Member # 6352) on 08-26-2011, 07:30 AM:

Thank you one and all for the different information regarding the different cinema servers. I am currently trying to figure out what would be the best server for my theaters needs. I am the head protectionist for a single screen theater here in Illinois.

I have considered both the Dolby and the GDC, but am looking for some opinions and suggestions as to why go with one over the other. We are looking.g at converting in early 2012. We have traditionally been about 2-3 weeks from the break on our films. We show 1 film each week, every night.

I would appreciate any insight that you can provide to me as I try to make an informed decision. I've been working at this theater for approximately 6 years as a protectionist and am comfortable with the technology and computers. Please feel free to either email or pm me with any questions that you have in regards to my theater.

Thank you in advance for your help,
Robert

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-26-2011, 07:38 AM:

Terrence - you are right that the type of RAID config makes the difference, not the number of drives directly. However, some servers allow to have a backup drive inserted all the time. So, if like on the Dolby servers, RAID repair can happen automatically, a pre-existing spare drive could essentially mean another stage of automatic redundancy, even if the RAID5 itself would only allow a one-drive failure.

Of course it is always necessary to have proper drive/failure monitoring and signaling so that a failed drive can be exchanged as soon as possible, no matter how much redundancy.

@Robert: May be wrong for your part of the world, but it seems that Dolby and Doremi are the servers that most screens use. If you are single screen with no chain/company/VPF implications, I would go with one of these two.

I started this thread not about servers in general, but about the new possibility of having DSS220/Doremi ShowVault + IMB even in installations where 4k is not planned (4k DLP so far was the only hard condition for IMB solutions).

When you are planning for early 2012, both Doremi ShowVault and DSS220 might be an option for you then. To me it seems IMB is more sustainable. I just don't know when it will be considered mature.

Of course, a traditional server with integrated media block is no dead-end. You can always upgrade to a series-II IMB later, and probably a Doremi 2k4 and DSS200 can be upgraded with the necessary IMB interface and software as well. It just costs more and it will need some retrofitting on the installation side.

- Carsten

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 11-14-2011, 05:06 AM:

Dolby updated their Digital Cinema price list and now get's more explicit on DSS220 and IMB 2k/4k options, although they don't give any pricing for the DSS220/IMB configs. They do quote HighFrameRate 3D now for the IMB solution.

http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/Assets/US/Doc/Professional/Dolby_Cinema_Products_Price_List.pdf

They also raised the price of the Dolby 3D glasses against the last pricelist:

CAT 832 (3M) was 12US$, now 15US$
CAT 834 (glas) was 17US$, now 25US$(!)

As to how much this will come out with real quantity deals, I don't know, but the increase for the higher quality glas version CAT 834 will render them obsolete very quickly. Seems Dolby wants to get rid of them.
There goes the best 3D system...

- Carsten

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-14-2011, 09:24 AM:

The 3D glasses prices did not go up as much as the list price would indicate.

The previous list pricing had a very thin mark up for the dealer due to some error at Dolby.

The dealer discount for this item is now the same as for all the other hardware.