No, but I have noticed that 1 gig networks really don't pass 1 gig worth of stuff. Especially with cat 5 cables. Maybe cat 7 if they are available will help.
JJK

>If you do use an NAS, then make sure all PCs mount to the same drive letter so that the veg files are transportable.

I think it is better to use the Windows 7 (or greater) Library system since Windows sometimes indiscriminately reassigns drive letters.

/jerry

I don't bother with drive letters over the network. I go by share name. For example:

\\maindesktop\video\project1\...

I have ran a business over a 1 gig network for many years. I use shares - and the process I deploy might be called distributed computing rather than a Vegas app being network deployed. Although some will argue with my terms - here is how it works.
Every NLE workstation is a very poweful unit in its own right, each can be fully occupied with application work from photo editing to word processing and each has a fully licensed VegasPro installed.

The 1 gig network transfers back and forth digital intermediates like Cineform, Sony MXF, and Avid DNXHD of program segments from a project. So segment A could be from computer A, B , B etc. Then NLE assembly or other tasks like Blu-ray writing and duplication take place simultaneously elsewhere. All stations are busy 24 hrs a day with concurrent tasks.

"since Windows sometimes indiscriminately reassigns drive letters"

Not when you map the drive. (I know, I said Mount, which is the same thing in Linux).

Thanks for the fine feedback.
Everything has been working well, and it's comforting to have all data in one place, and backed up every night.
I will upgrade my ethernet to cat 7, just to keep the system clean.
Right now we are storing all elements on an i7 connected by the ethernet. Is it possible (preferable? ) to keep the data on a third, data only machine?
How would that work? Would it be more efficient?

Well, if it was on a data-only server, then at least other computers wouldn't be slowed in their access by that one doing other jobs like rendering. Would it be a major difference? Probably not. Noticeable? Maybe just slightly.

vicmilt - seems to me you are referring to archiving? I have no idea what kind of work you are doing and what the stages of backup and archiving you actually are contemplating. This is a topic intertwined (apparently in your thread) with connectivity and networking, but the actual methodology has to do with other issues of the archiving topic.

Please elaborate on your concerns...

A NAS, a raid based server, whatever has disks attached have maximum write and read speed. From 200$ NAS to 900.000$ EMC2 SAN storage....

Concurrent access can make things slower... with one pc you make ingestion (write on the server) and with other 2 computers you edit a multicamera project...

@videoITguy
can't understand your setup exactly. When editing, are the files you need copied to local harddisk ? Or are they accessed via lan ?

Editing files ( digital intermediates and original copies) are always edited with local harddrive ingestion. Local can mean a USB port, or local backplane installed Raid, - never edit across the LAN!
Compressed video preview streams are offered across the LAN as preview or reference file comparisons between workstations - they are not part of the edit in real time.

Thanks for the fine feedback.
Everything has been working well, and it's comforting to have all data in one place, and backed up every night.
I will upgrade my ethernet to cat 7, just to keep the system clean.
Right now we are storing all elements on an i7 connected by the ethernet. Is it possible (preferable? ) to keep the data on a third, data only machine?
How would that work? Would it be more efficient?

The two most important issues to worry about in a backup (archiving) plan for an NLE file system? Vicmilt...

1) Volatility
2) Place

1) If you store on a harddrive whether it is running daily or sporadically is not a great solution - it is an interim step - better optical disk
2) Always store two copies, one can be on site, the other must be offisite.

Posted by: vicmilt, Date: 2/21/2014 1:56:48 AM
Has anyone tried to edit with Vegas over an ethernet (or other) network?
I've accumulated a few computers, and would like to retain all my source material in one place, and use the other machinery as edit terminals.

It's working over a 1gig network, but sometimes bogs down.
Vic,
Sound like you're you're bottleneck is the shared server where the data is archived. One solution is to use a server and switch that can do NIC teaming. This will combine the bandwidth of multiple NICs. Cisco calls this etherchanneling. This is also done a lot on high bandwidth network connections (trunks) between switches. In this scenario each workstation needs to be connected to the switch that is connected to the server. Daisy chaining switches will only move the bottleneck to the next switch upstream. (:

Oh yes, and as others have mentioned you'll need high quality cable infrastructure at least CAT 5e / 6 w/ CAT 5e / 6 grade hardware. Pls note that CAT 7 jacks are different from standard CAT 5 & 6 RJ45.

On a Gigabit network, you can probably get away with CAT-5e cabling for short runs (maybe 5 or 6 feet), but I wouldn't use anything but CAT-6 for longer runs. Ideally, CAT-6 for everything.

I can reliably share many AVCHD video streams from a server on a few machines simultaneously, serving up multiple streams of Cineform and DNxHD HD files, not so much.

That's been my experience too here with our office LAN. Up to about 10 or 12 feet we still get full gigabit speed over CAT-5, but anything beyond that it drops down to 100Mbps. CAT-6 maintains full speed on runs over 250 feet. As we lose old CAT-5 cables or they become damaged we replace them with CAT-6, but we still have a lot of them in use on people's desks between their PCs and the workgroup switches.

All the data centers i've been to use CAT-6 for everything. I had never even heard of CAT-7 before i read this thread.