|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Quote:
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Quote:
edit for additional: I Googled 'slow boot times in APFS' and did find some older stuff like from 2017/2018 and using early versions of High Sierra. What isn't clear in some of the posts is whether people are talking about times from when they push the power button to usable desktop or from the startup chime/pong to usable desktop. All I can say is what I had happen here. For quite a while up until late last year I was running OSX 10.12.6 on a 1TB Samsung 850 EVO on a pcie adapter card from OWC in the slot next to my cheesegrater's video card. Time from push power button to usable desktop was about 40 seconds and from pong to usable desktop was about 15 seconds (trim enabled). When I changed from Sierra to OSX 10.13.6 my times skyrocketed to double the previous times UNTIL I zapped the nvram/pram. The times went back down to about 35 seconds total and 14/15 seconds from pong to usable desktop. So for me at least APFS even go a little faster than HFS. Note that these are cold boot times and a warm boot is slightly faster in the initialization/POST phase. Last edited by musicman691; 01-25-2020 at 04:41 AM. Reason: added my testing results |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Don't think so. Works fine here. Even converting a multi-Terrabyte-drive from HFS+ to APFS only takes a minute or two.
__________________
PTHDn 2024.3 (OSX13.6.5), 8x8x8, MacPro 14,8, AJA LHi, SYNC HD, all genlocked via AJA GEN10, 64GB RAM, Xilica Neutrino, Meyersound Acheron |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Quote:
Here Frank may not be doing extensive edits on the content on video and audio files on those HDD. (just editing a session containing those files is not necessarily modifying/writing changes to the video files)... and besides Pro Tools disk cache hides so many IO issues. APFS on those drives provide extra robustness over HFS+ but if stuff is not getting changed on much on thise drives you may not need that, so kinda a catch 22. Personally I might also want to use APFS on a HDD if I had to for other features it provides even if it degraded performance, like snapshots or shared free space. There is no automatic correct answer here, do what works for you... well except if you are using SSD then you really want to be on APFS on recent macOS versions, and maybe if on HDD you want to move to SSD and APFS if it is affordable and you want extra performance. Again lots of stuff related to APFS is discussed all over the Web. --- Worrying about boot time "problems" for NVMe or APFS seems silly, if that is an issues then again I suspect something is setup wrong/known issues/old bugs have not been taken care of. Again all well discussed on line... which makes me wish that folks would list exactly which of those known issues they have worked around/applied fixed for excluded before posting here. Last edited by Darryl Ramm; 01-25-2020 at 11:15 AM. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Further to Darryl’s (typically!) well-informed comments on the use of APFS on HDDs/spinners, whilst most advice is to stick with HFS+ for HDDs, I suspect this is mainly to protect less-informed users and avoid issues in case the new filesystem is used inappropriately.
As Darryl mentions, the main use-case to avoid APFS is when working with lots of edited files, such as when using a DAW/Pro Tools or an NLE/Final Cut Pro, for example. In this scenario, performance can be expected to degrade as the number of edits/files increases. Another absolute non-starter is Time Machine - these must continue to use HFS+. However, for backups such as clones made with CCC, where typically a changed file on the destination drive is deleted and replaced with a new copy, the helpful support at Bombich (CCC developer) recommended APFS when I was restructuring my backups recently, as the ‘pros’ (flexible partitions are great to backup multiple Macs to a single drive and other APFS improvements designed for reliability even if not an SSD, still apply) in this case outweigh the ‘cons’. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Quote:
No edit in PT actually modifies the audio (or video) on disk. But maybe I'm misunderstanding... I can't imagine a field with more edits on video and audio than film post. Especially in super-sessions containing 2-3 generations of 6-reel films. However, I've been (unwittingly) working with APFS for 2 films now with no difference in performance. It's neither better nor worse. Heck on a 5.1 mac you don't even notice a difference in performance between SSD and HDD with ProTools. Tried all that. It's all really paper specs. Might be different on 6,1 upwards but irrelevant on a 12-core cheesegrater. This "wisdom" has saved me so much money on SSD cost. Every project needs a 4TB drive nowadays. SSD is (still) too expensive to be treated like expendables. Again all my totally subjective impressions... take them with a grain of salt.
__________________
PTHDn 2024.3 (OSX13.6.5), 8x8x8, MacPro 14,8, AJA LHi, SYNC HD, all genlocked via AJA GEN10, 64GB RAM, Xilica Neutrino, Meyersound Acheron |
#37
|
||||
|
||||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
True. Even the "destrcuctive" audiosuite processing creates a new file. Or consolidate. Nothing modifies the old file, which you can of course get rid of once it becomes unnecessary (though I never do that)
__________________
Janne What we do in life, echoes in eternity. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Quote:
A Samsung 860 EVO 4 TB size is $580 US from B&H. That's not too bad a price to be honest. For archival I'd say spinners all the way. For everything else - ssd. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Quote:
Over here an 860 EVO pro 4TB is around 1000€. A 4TB WD Black is 200€. Times three bays that's a massive difference per drive bay: 2400€ total. I'm sure they perform great in a machine with a more capable interfaces. So far what I've seen here wasn't worth the investment...
__________________
PTHDn 2024.3 (OSX13.6.5), 8x8x8, MacPro 14,8, AJA LHi, SYNC HD, all genlocked via AJA GEN10, 64GB RAM, Xilica Neutrino, Meyersound Acheron Last edited by Frank Kruse; 01-26-2020 at 09:05 AM. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Re: APFS or Extended Journaled for session drive?
Quote:
--- I am not sure what the argument going on is here... As for performance, if a system is working for any user then great. And your work with high-end video is very different than others working audio. One great way to decrease performance is make unneeded changes and get nothing working Throwing backwards and forwards arguments about "SSDs" may be kinda meaningless. Starting with different SSD performance in a legacy cheese grater can differ by about an order of magnitude. Are you talking old SATA II SSD, or modern PCIe 3/NVMe drives on a PCIe 2 to 3 card. And what file system? And what dimension are you guys even basing some judgement on... session startup/disk cache load time? session save time? VI sample/load time? VI sample/streaming performance? to operate reliably with auto save? system boot time? system clone/backup/recovery time? Is your Pro Tools performance actually CPU bound? or limited by something else? ... so many dimensions here. At~$150-$300/TB for even NVMe SSD (plus a switch card in legacy cheese graters) I would expect they do fall into easy upgrade choices for many users *if* they give a performance benefit for that user ... and if they they have free PCIe slots in legacy cheese graters. Boot/system drives, ideally NVMe, I always expect users to see a benefit from, with "snappier" overall systems performance, faster Pro Tools startup, VI load times (if memory cached samples are on the boot drive), and faster boot (modulo a few known/hopefully avoidable problems). For many folks not working with video or very large VI libraries, a single NVMe SSD may be lower cost than other options because they can get everything on one very fast drive. Last edited by Darryl Ramm; 01-26-2020 at 11:08 AM. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Journaled or Extended... | delaplanemusic | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 5 | 04-14-2008 01:35 AM |
Journaled Drive | SteveGarman | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 4 | 12-05-2006 01:47 AM |
EXTENDED Vs JOURNALED HD FORMATS | Dual Mackie | Storage Subsystems | 3 | 02-25-2005 04:41 PM |
Mac OsX Extended Journaled Problem | Luis Miguel | Storage Subsystems | 4 | 11-03-2004 07:21 AM |
Format Extended or Extended Journaled for PT6.2.3? | AAR | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 3 | 02-06-2004 07:46 AM |