I have a existing wd duo 20tb in raid configuration back up / redundancy but it is real slow in disk speed test especially when migrating large files in mass i am currently updating my lightroom catalogue as i have a new pc ,which is painful meaning i have to import on to drive basically having two copies of each image until i delete the old the version remind me never loose lightroom catlogues or delete them all ,not really knowing the best way to save my images or how catalouge correctly some people have multiple catalogues ,i have purchased a das qnap tn-02 hoping this will improve things for faster read and writes over my existing wd duo ,i also purchased a iron wolf pro 16tb hoping to get a second one that iwas going to install on the qnap but i might change this as synology are getting bad press at moment with used sales of hard drives used on crypto farms etc although i think this is more exos range ,so what i am really asking is sata iii always going to be my bottle neck wth read write on das drives with mechanical drives even if transfer rates are greater now with thunderbolt and usb 4.0 etc .Is it worth getting a owc back up soloution or gtech or lacie if i am only buying mechanical drives is ssd3 always going to be the bottle the neck with read writes .Any info much appreciated
Back up storage solutions
- Thread starter paul10
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 2,162
That's a load of text there that needs parsing... 
Anyway, so from what I can tell from your post:
1. Your limitation is from the mechanical drives. It's not the drives SATA3 interface that's the isssue. Mechanical Drives will be limited by speeds of around 120MB(yte) per second on a good day these days on a sequential run (either read or write, but not both at the same time), but the larger the drive is, the longer it'll take to get things done as it becomes more full (and the more it has to go looking through).
2. SATA3 with a SSD can hit 500MB(yte) per second on average per drive. And even after exhausting the DRAM Cache (if there's any onboard the SSD) it can still hit 200-300MB(yte) per second if it's just large files it is handling. And if like above you need to read and write at the same time and split the available speed in half, you're still looking at 100+ MB(byte) per second speeds, rather than 40-50MB(yte) per second that's on a mechanical drive during non linear use.
3. So in your case, it won't matter what interface (USB3, USB4, Thunderbolt, etc) you swap to (GTech or Lacie or anyone else), as the interface speed there is just between the device and your computer. The storage is still going to be the slowest part of the device there; and if you want to have a faster experience, that's what you'll need to update to something better, not the drive interface itself. But be aware, that SSD storage (SATA, NVME, etc) are not competitive vs mechanical drives price per GB (storage) wise.
Anyway, so from what I can tell from your post:
1. Your limitation is from the mechanical drives. It's not the drives SATA3 interface that's the isssue. Mechanical Drives will be limited by speeds of around 120MB(yte) per second on a good day these days on a sequential run (either read or write, but not both at the same time), but the larger the drive is, the longer it'll take to get things done as it becomes more full (and the more it has to go looking through).
2. SATA3 with a SSD can hit 500MB(yte) per second on average per drive. And even after exhausting the DRAM Cache (if there's any onboard the SSD) it can still hit 200-300MB(yte) per second if it's just large files it is handling. And if like above you need to read and write at the same time and split the available speed in half, you're still looking at 100+ MB(byte) per second speeds, rather than 40-50MB(yte) per second that's on a mechanical drive during non linear use.
3. So in your case, it won't matter what interface (USB3, USB4, Thunderbolt, etc) you swap to (GTech or Lacie or anyone else), as the interface speed there is just between the device and your computer. The storage is still going to be the slowest part of the device there; and if you want to have a faster experience, that's what you'll need to update to something better, not the drive interface itself. But be aware, that SSD storage (SATA, NVME, etc) are not competitive vs mechanical drives price per GB (storage) wise.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 2,162
Looking around online about Lightroom Catalogues, it looks like most recommend that you keep your Catalog entirely on the system you work from; the images can be held on an external drive or storage, but the Catalog itself shouldn't be moved around due to possibility of corruption. Just Import and Export direct from machine to machine (when you update it), don't touch the image files themselves.
I am unsure how your workflow is right now regarding Lightroom Catalogues, but if I'm reading this right, it means that you should only ever had a slow transfer of your images one time to the external storage; when you first transfer your collection to the external drive. After which, because you are not performing major writes to the external drive anymore, you are only limited by it's read speeds mostly, as the Catalog on your machine already knows where it's stored (on the external storage). So when you import the Catalog from your old machine to the new one, it already knows where everything is stored on the external storage and any writes it needs to perform will be on your local machine instead. This will be less hampered by slower drives then (you still will be, but less so, as you are only reading from the drive then).
If you are bringing EVERYTHING along with you instead (ending up having two copies), this is probably where your workflow has gone wrong and why it's slower than it needs to be had the workflow been set up to work in the way described above. Keep the photos on the External Storage (Mechanic, SSD, or otherwise) and only Import/Export your Catalog only; don't keep everything together as that just means you need to double up everything every time you make major changes instead of just to the Catalog.
I am unsure how your workflow is right now regarding Lightroom Catalogues, but if I'm reading this right, it means that you should only ever had a slow transfer of your images one time to the external storage; when you first transfer your collection to the external drive. After which, because you are not performing major writes to the external drive anymore, you are only limited by it's read speeds mostly, as the Catalog on your machine already knows where it's stored (on the external storage). So when you import the Catalog from your old machine to the new one, it already knows where everything is stored on the external storage and any writes it needs to perform will be on your local machine instead. This will be less hampered by slower drives then (you still will be, but less so, as you are only reading from the drive then).
If you are bringing EVERYTHING along with you instead (ending up having two copies), this is probably where your workflow has gone wrong and why it's slower than it needs to be had the workflow been set up to work in the way described above. Keep the photos on the External Storage (Mechanic, SSD, or otherwise) and only Import/Export your Catalog only; don't keep everything together as that just means you need to double up everything every time you make major changes instead of just to the Catalog.