Am 24.06.2014 um 23:30 schrieb Jonathan K. F. Jensen: Hmm, Carl would know for sure, but from my network benchmarks it seems that the master is still doing a full image/compression pipeline per configured thread in addition to supplying raw images to remote nodes. In the case of e.g. Big Buck Bunny the 'Master' would actually be bored when only supplying a bunch of unprocessed 853*480 pix to the remote nodes. As long as we think of a 'classic' DCP-o-matic workflow, that is, conversion of pre-encoded video to J2k-MXFs, I think mass storage performance is not so important - because we come from a low-bandwith compressed video format and go to a medium-bandwith compressed format. Again, in the case of Big Buck Bunny, we have a videostream of 11Mbyte (that fits into the filesystem cache) with around 350KByte/s and end up with two MXFs at something like 25MByte/s - but with the encoding an thus file write performance on said CPUs is taking place at half realtime speed. So, typically we come from something like 1MByte/s and go to 15Mbyte/s. That's well within the limits of common single drive hard discs. This, of course, changes dramatically when working from uncompressed single image sequences (like most other DCP encoding tools do), or very high quality FullHD sources with low compression ratios. - Carsten