Recently I've been trying to evaluate the load of nuke renders on our file server, and ran a few tests comparing multichannel vs. non-multichannel reads, and my initial test results were opposite of what I was expecting. My tests showed that multichannel comps rendered about 20-25% slower, and made about 25% more load on the server in terms of disk reads. I was expecting the opposite, since there are fewer files being called with multichannel reads.
For what it's worth, all reads were zip1 compressed EXRs and I tested real comps, as well as extremely simplified comps where the multichannel files were branched and then fed into a contact sheet. I was monitoring performance using the performance monitor on the file server using only 20 nodes and with almost nobody using the server. Can anyone explain this? Or am I wrong and need to redo these tests? Thanks, Ryan
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
