Aperture slow, library too large?

melkbus wrote:
Ok, I'm gonna try 6GB in my early 2008 iMac. Is it important to buy the same (brand) RAM that is installed now?

No. However in Mac Pros I would buy matched sets of RAM.

-Allen Wicks

Kevin,

I just got around to reading your response again, and did a bit of checking on the specs of my computer and checked out softraid.com as well. I do have some questions, but just to be clear, I do not fall into the category of a professional photographer. Sure, Aperture is a pro level application, but I use its functions as an avid hobbyist.

That being said, I am still looking for the best solution to manage my storage and backup needs. I am probably looking for safety first over speed, but I am never one to diminish the importance of speed when it comes to workflow efficiency. While I don't spend the amount of time a professional photographer spends, I do spend quite a bit of time working within Aperture.

There are three things which I am looking to achieve. One is having an ideal backup solution for my data. This is paramount, as I consider my photo library an irreplaceable asset. The second is figuring out a way to combine (if possible) this backup solution with the ability to use the external HD's as the drives that I use to keep my referenced masters on. Up to this point, all of my imported photos have been managed masters, and while I have only been importing jpegs and not RAW images, my library is getting large and my internal HD is getting filled up (more than half now). The third thing is incorporating a system which utilizes maximum speed and safety (at a reasonable cost/value ratio). I know it is impossible to achieve all things in one shot and that there are tradeoffs, but I am trying to better understand those tradeoffs for my needs by understanding the costs/benefits associated with them.

Anyway, onto your response and some of my comments/questions:

1. I have 4GB of RAM, and to this point I haven't been all that frustrated by pageouts. Now this could be due to the fact that my library just isn't big enough to be affected (yet), or that fact that I have been primarily working with smaller sized jpegs over RAW images, but pageouts haven't been a problem for me to this point aside from Aperture occasionally quitting on me. This has also happened to me in iMovie, so perhaps upgrading the RAM is necessary at this point? I'm hesitant to do so based on the cost of RAM and usually like to do that a bit further down the line when the cost of RAM comes down. I will certainly look into the prices now and consider at least moving to 6 GB's and possibly 8. I have never really understood the differences in RAM by brand, and tend to think of them as basically being the same, but sold with different names on them. Apple RAM has always been so much more expensive than 3rd party RAM. What brands would you recommend, and how would you go about replacing it? Would you take out 1 2GB chip and replace it with a 4GB chip to get to 6, or would you just take both 2 GB chips out and put in two new 4 GB's in their place?

2. As far as VRAM, I do have 512 MB's, but only when I use the higher display set as the default. I always do though unless I travel and want a longer battery life. This is hardly the case, so I almost always operate at the 512 level.

3. My internal HD is a 320 GB Hitachi drive that spins at 7200 RPM. I don't think I need to replace that just yet for my needs, but would probably consider going to an SSD drive when the price comes down a bit more. I was a little confused on your comments regarding the read/write rates for the SSD drives and the benefits associated with that. I had the understanding that SSD drives were safer and more durable in case of bumps and drops, but I didn't realize that they actually performed better from a read/write standpoint. Based on my usage, can you explain a bit more about them as it would pertain to whether or not I would truly benefit from one over what I currently have as my internal HD?

4. I was definitely going to use eSata and thus, why I was considering a G-Tech external drive. I thought that my mbp 17 came with a built-in card, but after re-reading your response, it sounds like I will have to go and buy one? Perhaps I have one, but you don't feel that it is adequate to set up a stripe? I'm not too clear on what you meant in this part of your post. I will most likely use a single channel eSata based on what I understood, but again a little more clarity based on the type of user I am would be greatly beneficial.

I understand (to a point) what striping is, but I have never setup any type of RAID or quasi-RAID, so I don't know if I fully understand what it means in the real world, nor how to actually use it. I'm not even sure if I need it, but based on what you said, it sounds as though I need a dual channel eSata stripe at the very minimum.

5. Lastly, I'm not really sure that I understand how softraid.com fits into all of this. I get it, but I don't get it if you know what I mean.

Okay, that is it for now. Looking forward to hearing your response and moving this thing along. As always, thanks for sharing your expertise.

MK

Hi MK,

OK, lots of questions, no problem, but I will probably take this in pieces since I don’t have a ton of time tonite.

I will just start answering some questions in no particular order…

First, what is SoftRAID? Fair enough, it is a program that does much of what Apple’s Disk Utility RAID tab does, but does it in a flexible and much more comprehensive way. I provides a disk driver to control disk functions and report errors. It has a nice interface that allows you to easily create whatever combination of storage configs you need…and the guys who write it have been in this game for years and have forgotten more about RAID on the Mac than most companies know, making their yearly support contract for $99 a great deal.

1) OK, you got 4GB of RAM – the DDR3 expensive kind, in two 2GB modules. The DDR2 4gig module my 08 MBP takes is only $139, unfortunately yours is a good deal faster and today that means more expensive. OWC has a 4GB module for $267 (replace one of your 2GB modules), or an 8GB (2 of the 4GB modules, max RAM) for $519. The one thing you cannot go wrong with on a UNIX-based system is more RAM. I would do this before worrying about the performance of a storage system. Almost all RAM today is lifetime warranty, OWC has been doing this for years and is very reputable. There is not a lot of differences in RAM by brand, as today’s RAM is sold to meet a speed spec, unlike RAM of 15 years ago. http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/8566DDR3S4GB/ and http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/8566DDR3S8GP/
2) VRAM looks good to go, no problem.
3) Internal drive looks good, but SSDs are capable of 250GB sec read and 200 write
4) OK, now comes the bad news…sadly as far as I know the only Macs that can use the eSATA bus is the Mac Pro (with a host adapter) and any MBP that has the ExpressCard slot. Today the only new MBP that can do this is the 17”…I think Apple made a mistake putting SD card readers in place of the ability to have a real high speed data bus in the new 13" and 15". As a matter of fact, this is my only serious gripe with the iMac.
Let’s clarify things a bit…almost all of the drive mechanisms sold today for computers are SATA. INSIDE your iMac, you have a single channel native SATA host adapter, and your Hitachi 320GB can therefore read and write to it physical limits. For a point of reference, let’s assume real world is about 90MB/sec. GREAT!
Sadly, once we venture outside the iMac itself, and go to connect an external hard drive or any storage array, we do not have any way to connect at that great speed. We have 2, possible 3 choices of connections to plug the external storage to the iMac. Let’s also assume as a reference we will use the same model Hitachi mechanism that it uses on its internal SATA bus. We would simply buy empty drive enclosures, and put a mechanism in them. Best choice is the FireWire 800, that Hitachi mechanism would max out at about 50MB/sec reading and 30-40 writing. Less than half the performance the drive is capable of, strangled by FW800. I also caution you not to have any other devices running on that bus, or they will steal more bandwidth. Second choice, is USB 2.0… that Hitachi mechanism would max out at about 25MB/sec reading and 15-20 writing. Third, there is also iSCSI and that uses the gigabit Ethernet connector. In theory it is 20% faster than FW800…but if you have much network traffic that spec drops off quickly.
I really have no idea why Apple does not support eSATA directly, many PCs have done for a while.
So…to clarify, an iMac cannot do eSATA. eSATA allows a drive to operate at its native speed.
a. OK, just thinking out loud here. I think the best you can do for performance is a SATA drive. Unfortunately, the only bus you have to connect that to at full speed is inside the computer. OK, then get a 2TB WD drive to replace the Hitachi, partition the first (outer 1TB) to be data, the next 512GB to be for boot, leave the inner (slowest) 512 alone. Given the setup, this will provide 90MB/Sec. more that double FW800.
b. Run a FW800 Drobo for vault backup onsite, using 2 2TB drives to start
c. Run a daily/weekly copy of the Aperture library onto a removable FW800 hard drive, taking it offsite on a regular schedule.

OK I am getting tired so I will sign off for now…will do more later.

Thanks,

Kevin

Kevin,

just a quick note to clarify something before you continue. I think you have me mixed up with another user. I have the '09 17" MacBook pro with an eSata slot, not an iMac like you were alluding to. There are some othe users in this thread who you have been responding to you also who have an iMac. I think you might have mixed us up.

In any case, let me know if that changes things bases on your advice in your last response. I think it should.

Thanks,

MK

Kevin J. Doyle wrote:

Third, there is also iSCSI and that uses the gigabit Ethernet connector. In theory it is 20% faster than FW800…but if you have much network traffic that spec drops off quickly.

I do have an iMac and I'm finding this interesting!! I have a NAS drive directly attached to it with the Gigabit ethernet, is this what you are referring to as iSCSI?

Kevin, great post. Thanks

I've checked activity monitor on my 3-year old Macbook1,1 and determined that:

*The _USB connection_ between the MacBook and my external Aperture library is not a factor on performance.
*The total _size of the library_ (90GB) is not a factor on performance.
*The _2GB RAM_ limits performance when scrolling through thumbnails and when switching between Aperture and other programs. At those times, the page-in counts go up whilst 'data read/sec' and '%CPU' are within limits.
*The _2GHz processor_ is the limiting factor when loading and editing the original photos (and flipping through images in non-Preview-mode).

Flipping through images in Preview-mode and adding metadata is quite responsive, which is how I spend most of my Aperture time. If I was doing a lot of editing, I'd be doing a lot of waiting and/or would need an upgrade.

paullopez wrote:
I've checked activity monitor on my 3-year old Macbook1,1 and determined that:

*The _USB connection_ between the MacBook and my external Aperture library is not a factor on performance.

Without doubting your experience with a early generation single core lowest end Macbook I would suggest that your observations should not be extrapolated to suggest likely performance with any modern MacIntel.

-Allen Wicks

SierraDragon wrote:
...your observations should not be extrapolated to suggest likely performance with any modern MacIntel.

Agree, thanks.

just a quick note to clarify something before you continue. I think you have me mixed up with another user. I have the '09 17" MacBook pro with an eSata slot, not an iMac like you were alluding to. There are some othe users in this thread who you have been responding to you also who have an iMac. I think you might have mixed us up.
_________________
Hi again MK,

In the immortal words of Gilda Radner as Emily Litella on SNL…”nevermind”.

Sorry, that was the iMac explanation, yours will be better, as it will be like my setup, albeit yours is a newer faster MBP, and can take a max of 8GB RAM, with Apple’s blessing.

1) OK, in your 2.93 MBP, you got 4GB of RAM – the DDR3 expensive kind, in two 2GB modules. The DDR2 4gig module my 08 MBP takes is only $139, unfortunately yours is a good deal faster and today that means more expensive. OWC has a 4GB module for $259.97 (replace one of your 2GB modules), or an 8GB (2 of the 4GB modules, max RAM) for $519. The one thing you cannot go wrong with on a UNIX-based system is more RAM before anything else. I would do this before worrying about the performance of a storage system. Almost all RAM today is lifetime warranty, OWC has been doing this for years and is very reputable. There is not a lot of differences in RAM by brand, as today’s RAM is sold to meet a speed spec, unlike RAM of 15 years ago.
If you go for 8GB, you will be able to run more than just Aperture by itself, personally I would. http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/8566MDR3S4GB/and http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/8566DDR3S8GP/

2) VRAM looks good to go, no problem.

3) Your internal is OK for the moment, SSDs are capable of 250MB/sec., almost 3 times the speed of your internal on large transfers, and up to 36 times as fast on small files. Crucial’s M225 256GB SSD is selling for about $570 today, but having more RAM first and a good storage system and strategy will buy you more in the short term, and the SSD prices will keep dropping.

4) OK, while we may not end up going here…your MBP has a VERY sexy option that I would use in a heartbeat if I a unibody model. To be fair, it is only important if you are traveling and doing serious Aperture work in a hotel room. If the big stuff can wait till you get home, you don’t really need this.

a. Imagine that your MBP can read your Aperture library at 500MB/sec!!! That is almost 6 times faster than standard SATA and TEN TIMES FW800. MaxUpgrades has made this a reality with their MaxConnect Optical Bay kit for 13/15/ 17 Unibody MacBooks & MacBook Pros. The secret here, is that the optical drive in your new MBP uses a SATA channel, all previous MBP, like mine, the optical is IDE. This means all unibodies have TWO internal SATA channels. The kit provides a mount to replace your optical with a 2.5” drive or SSD, and includes an external case for your optical. All for $219, not including drives. Those super numbers I quote were from using TWO SSDs in a RAID 0 configuration, but even with two 500GB drives @ $129 each you can get 200MB/sec R&W in the same config. Given how infrequently I use the optical, having it outboard, and having the array in the machine is a much better use of space for me.
http://www.maxupgrades.com/istore/index.cfm?fuseaction=Product.display&product_i d=186.

b. OK, back to reality…you said your priorities are safety first, and I agree. Safety is actually more a strategy than it is equipment, as it takes diligence to make the gear keep your data safe. Personally, I require my data exist in a MINIMUM of 3 different geographic locations at all times. Office, Home and Other…for me a safety deposit at my local bank. In a previous post I explained the 3 subsystems I use, one for speed, one for safety & backup, 3rd for archiving. Short of doing them all, the one to start with is safety & backup.

i. The least expensive way to go for this would be a four disk RAID 1 mirror with spare(s). You can buy a 4 bay Stardom ST5610-4S-SB2 for $289, four identical drives, probably WD WD10EADS 1TB 7200RPM SATA ($85 @ at Amazon), and a copy of SoftRAID, $129 from www.softraid.com.
The design of this config is to maintain the 2 disk mirror at all times, mean there are always a minimum of 2 mechanisms online with identical information. There is never an opportunity for a single mechanism failure to cause data loss. Read http://www.softraid.com/docs/RAIDBackupArticle.pdf to describe setup. I don’t want to include that text here as it is copywritten work. It is a 2003 article and refers to ATA drives and Firewire, ignore that just read the configure info. From this setup, you can grow into the higher-speed or portable performance configs, as well.

c. No matter what rig we cook up here, you will need the Tempo SATA Pro ExpressCard/34 by Sonnet (TSATAII-PRO-E34). Retailing at $199, it is the most expensive, but the best available today. It has port multiplication capability, and it the fastest unit available. I got mine from Provantage for about $170.
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/temposataproexpress34.html

That’s it for now, more later.

Kevin

Hi Kevin,

1. So I agree regarding the RAM. The last time I bought a RAM upgrade, I purchased it at macgurus.com. The OWC price is much better than what they are offering ($489 for 4GB, as opposed to the $512 for 8GB's from OWC). Okay, I will get the RAM, as it never hurts to max out in that area anyway. I'm just so shocked that Apple charges so much for their RAM - over twice as much as what OWC charges. $1200 for 8GB's (2 4GB chips is crazy, but that discussion is for a different arena. I understand why Apple does it).

2. As for my VRAM, I don't anticipate a problem as I always run the computer off of the higher graphics card. The only time I would switch would be if I wanted to max out my battery life if I were away and had to run off the internal battery. Even then, I think you only gain an hour with the lesser graphics card. To be honest, I don't even know why they constructed the machine this way. Maybe more time is gained with the lesser card? I don't know.

3. I can see the benefits of the SSD, but I am not ready to go in that direction yet. I would prefer to wait until the prices dropped considerably, which I anticipate they will. It is not an emergency that I need to make that upgrade this moment.

4a. You are right, I don't really need the "super" option you described in 4a. Sounds very cool, but I do not travel a lot for work, and certainly don't use Aperture professionally, so my editing can wait until I am home, at my desk and in front of my 24 inch LED Cinema Display. 500MB/sec? Wow! The whole config, even at the lower end of 200MB/sec sounds awesome, but I don't need it and would prefer to keep my optical internal for now.

4b. The strategy makes sense. I have been wanting to create a strategy, but was hesitant to get started with it because I didn't want to buy a hard drive like the G-Tech, and perhaps even a smaller portable "passport" to utilize this strategy. I do have a Time Capsule, but being that it sits in the same room as my MBP, this doesn't really create a sense of security should some disaster occur. That being said, this is what led me to our discussion about setting up a config that will not only protect, but optimize my work.

Now, by a "four disk raid mirror with spares", this essentially means setting up four external disks, where 2 are being used simply for backup that can be moved from location to location? The 4 disks are striped and independent of my internal disk, which basically functions on its own to control the OS and apps? And, the whole external config is going to run through the eSata channel provided by the Tempo card from Sonnet? Am I close to understanding this correctly thus far?

Michael

Hi Michael,

"Now, by a "four disk raid mirror with spares", this essentially means setting up four external disks, where 2 are being used simply for backup that can be moved from location to location? The 4 disks are striped and independent of my internal disk, which basically functions on its own to control the OS and apps? And, the whole external config is going to run through the eSata channel provided by the Tempo card from Sonnet? Am I close to understanding this correctly thus far?"

Not quite, in this first pass there is no striping, just mirroring involved. Basically put RAID Level 0 or STRIPING is for performance ONLY with no provision for safety. It combines 2 or more disks and splits the data evenly among the drives using the multiple drive heads to increase speed of operation. If any one of the drives in a RAID 0 array dies, ALL data is lost. In a striped array, assume four 1 TB disks, you would have 4 TB of very fast, but unprotected storage. This is the front end primary storage of all my systems, and you can add this in the future, but I am not suggesting this here to start.

RAID Level 1 is what we are using here - MIRRORING as opposed to STRIPING. Its design is complete redundancy over multiple drives. If a mechanism fails, all other mirrored drives are carrying the same information, so nothing is lost. The cost is that it is slower WRITING data than a single disk, but reads are slightly faster than a single drive using SoftRAID. This means your storage system assuming four 1TB disks, will total 1 TB of storage, the other 3 disks are exact copies.

First of all, I assume you are doing Time Machine for your internal drive to something else, that is not my concern here, although it is important from a convenience aspect. I assume you are keeping just System and Apps on the internal, easily replaced. My system is for the irreplaceable...your data specifically your photos. This is not to say you can't throw a disk image of your internal on the mirror.

"The 4 disks are striped and independent of my internal disk, which basically functions on its own to control the OS and apps? " NO....the 4 disks are mirrored, as follows:

Anyway, in the 4 disk system, you start with installing 3 of the disks in the box, and using SoftRAID your select all 3 disks and tell it to make a 3 way mirror volume. Call the volume "3-way Mirror" for ID sake here. In normal use thereafter, your Aperture library will reside on what appears be a single disk on your desktop, called "3-way Mirror". Very simple. Whenever you write to the library or import photos SoftRAID will be writing the exact same data bit-for-bit to 3 separate mechanisms with no more input from you. The reason I am using 3 disks, instead of 2 is that I want a redundancy 100% of the time. When I have 3 disks, and I go to swap one for offsite, there are always 2 identical mirrored disks running as the third disk is getting rebuilt into a 3rd mirror in the background by SoftRAID. That way I never once trust the data to the failure of a single mechanism, not even for a moment. Having 4 disks, you have only one offsite, if you want 2 offsites, as I do, you need 5 disks, but never more than 3 running in the array at once.

OK, now comes the time of day to call it quits, and you want to leave with your 3rd mirror mechanism, otherwise referred to as your rotation disk, because it keeps getting updated by overwriting the previous day's offsite you carry with you. Work done, quit all apps that are writing to the array. Open the SoftRAID app, and tell SoftRAID to split your "3-way Mirror" volume by creating a read-only secondary volume. When you do this, all 3 disks will temporarily appear on the desktop. You then eject the read-only disk (disk 3) and stick in in your bag go home with you for the night. Now, you take the disk you have not used yet (disk 4), and put it into the array box in the slot just vacated by disk 3. Finally, use SoftRAID's Add Secondary Disk command to add the new disk to the "3-way Mirror" array, and SoftRAID will go to work turning disk 4 into a mirror of the other two, and re-syncing the whole deal for work tomorrow. When you arrive the next day, simply select the array volume and the one "3-way Mirror" replaces the 3 disk icons on your desktop, and you are back to the simple one virtual volume original operation. Trust me, this sounds 1000x more complicated than it is. It takes me a couple of minutes each night, the only thing I do recommend is some nice antistatic hardshell carrying cases to protect the drives getting moved around.

"And, the whole external config is going to run through the eSata channel provided by the Tempo card from Sonnet? " YES, the enclosure I suggested uses port multipliers, and will only require a single cable/channel. We will use the other channel for something else in the future, like a high speed array...but not now.

Hope things are getting clearer...like so much else in technology, I could show you how to do this in no time, it just seems so heavy when you have to write it down, lol.

Kevin

Kevin

Kevin,

This is starting to make a lot more sense to me. I understand the reasoning behind a 4 disk (and in your case a 5 disk system), by allowing you to take at least 1 disk (and in your case 2 disks) offsite with you. Before proceeding, a few questions though:

1. I perform most of my work at night while at home. Therefore, I don't really go anywhere after I'm done working to take my 4th disk offsite. In a sense, doesn't this sort of defeat the "protection" aspect of what we are setting up here? I mean, god forbid there is a fire or some natural disaster over night, all my data would still reside in the same place. I could of course take the disk with me in the morning when I leave for work, but by not leaving right after a work flow, don't I really lose something in this strategy?

Also, it should be noted that I take my laptop with me to work sometimes and use it in the office when I am not busy doing real "work" stuff. In these situations, won't I be at a disadvantage from a data safety standpoint again since I couldn't possibly take the array with me?

You see, there are some things that go along with this setup that might not work well for me. Perhaps you could comment on that and or change up what we might do.

2. I think we both agreed that safety was numero uno on our list of priorities. I am a little bit weary of initially slowing down my writing speeds, but do like the fact that it will read faster (if we still end up going with this type of setup based on what I mentioned above). If I were to add speed later, are we talking about utilizing the same 4 disks (I am assuming no, as they are used primarily to protect data loss and can't be disturbed or used for speed as well). If that is the case, are we talking about setting up even more external disks for the speed strategy of RAID 0? Are we talking about having something like 8 external disks here?

Okay, those were my two main questions. To answer some of your questions:

You wrote:
"First of all, I assume you are doing Time Machine for your internal drive to something else, that is not my concern here, although it is important from a convenience aspect. I assume you are keeping just System and Apps on the internal, easily replaced. My system is for the irreplaceable...your data specifically your photos. This is not to say you can't throw a disk image of your internal on the mirror."

I am running Time Machine for my internal to my 1 TB Time Capsule. I have more than just system and apps on the internal right now, because all I have is the internal and my Time Machine backup of it which is being stored on the TIme Capsule. This is why I need to set up a better system to safeguard my important and irreplaceable data such as my photos, etc.

Okay, I guess that is it for now, as I think we need to figure out if your initial go at this is the best choice for my working situation based on what I described above. I'll wait for your reply.

Thanks,

Michael

Hi Michael,

I am glad you are getting a good feel for the system.

1) First of all, the strategy is flexible. Goal #1 is to have your data in different locations. Since you are not doing this professionally, meaning everyday, then do your rotation disk before you go to the bank, say weekly. I drop a disk in my safety deposit box when I make my weekly bank visit. This alone satisfies the geographic safety issue.

2) Yes, more disks are needed. I worked with a 5 slot system for almost 3 years, no problems. That would probably be all you would need. Three slots for a striped 0 volume, mirroring to slots 4 and 5. Five is your rotation disk. You can also do background (slightly delayed, non immediate mirroring so that the stripe does not get slowed by the mirror write delay.

There are many times when I am travelling, and I tend to create a library and project file for this purpose. I integrate it in my main library when I return. While on the road, I make nightly backups in the hotel room to a separate drive I take with me, or leave in the hotel safe when I leave the room to shoot for the day. In this scenario, I use my 1TB dual striped array of 2.5" drives, and copy my work after the session to a backup. Not the same safety level as home, but I only am at risk to lose one night's editing work. Knock wood, that has never happened to me. This is a faster operating setup than what I have suggested for you, BUT your data is at risk until you make the backup of the stripe at the end of the session. Also, if it is an extended trip, I use an internet vault to upload and hold the images virtually. I use PhotoShelter, but you could do fine with iDisk if your needs are less.

Speaking of PhotoShelter, they have an excellent article regarding photo storage, types, pros, cons and costs...give this a read it is very good stuff.
http://blog.photoshelter.com/corp/2009/06/how-to-store-your-digital-phot.html

The one thing to remember here is that all this new speed/safety does complicate things, and asks more of you to make it all effective. A lot of folks buy this stuff and never maintain it correctly which is a colossal waste. I don't have a choice, it is how I make a living so I am motivated to keep this up. I figured I would say that since unlike Time Machine and Capsule (which I also use for basic backups) this does not take over the backup responsibilities, it adds to them.

Regards,

Kevin

Kevin, you are aces!

Awesome posts.

For backup I use Phanfare. They store RAW and JPEG and video up to 20 minutes.

Thanks for the kind words.

I just checked out Phanfare looks pretty cool...

Kevin