@patch said in Proxmox zfs install error: I wasn’t sure if both the host and client using zfs was compatible. I suppose you are not using ZFS on the VM data store at all.

It looks like after I shutdown the VM and started back up and is showing the option active. I guess just a reboot isn't sufficient enough to enable it for me at least.

@jimp Yeah, it did, at least partially: cat /dev/sndstat output: No devices installed. No devices installed from userspace. usbconfig output: No device match or lack of permissions. so setting pcm0 en uhci0 to diabled helped with that. But it did not lower the CPU load from IRQ11 and the device are still visible with pciconf -lvb Only thing I can do is contact the hosting company. I have linked them to this this thread, maybe that will help to convince them to change the KVM config for Pfsense VM's.

@jimp i just ended up reinstalling because nothing else was working. thanks for the help though

IIRC, legacy NICs are limited to 100Mbps.

@johnpoz i have installed 2.5.1-RELEASE (amd64).

@drumsergio You're doing it backwards. Install Proxmox or ESXi on the Qotom and then virtualize pfSense and whatever other VMs you want.

Probably doesn't help, but I'm using 2.5.1 on Hyper-V on 2012R2, Gen1, ZFS without issues, either running or upgrading. But I did build myself a fresh 2.5.1 with restored config after a while, just because.

@spacecabbie No you can't use it like that. pfSense does support high-availability configurations but that requires you to run two guest instances of pfSense linked together on different hypervisor hosts. If it's that much of a concern then go pick up an SG-1100 and then you can reboot without losing connectivity.

@ahking19 I set it up early last week to test it to see if that would remain stable. After it’s been up for nearly a week, I didn’t have time this weekend to roll back. I also made a few config changes on in the firewall and a VLAN tag that I would need to replicate from the 2.5.1 router that was crashing and the router on a stick back to the 2.4.5 VM. In this case, it’s not quite as simple as just hitting the “roll back” button.

@matt_alton I followed below process https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwBanc4IGsI

@matt_alton I saw the same behavior but then on my wan link. I am running physical tho. I ditched 2.5.1 went back to 2.5 and everything was back in order and stable. I’d love to go back to 2.4.5 p1 but I cannot install latest version of pfblockerng. My advise, stay clear of the 2.5 line of releases as long as you can.

@kiokoman Thank you so much, I don't know why I had such difficulty figuring this out. Thanks again!

I have checked the suggested optimizations. default: vmx0: Using 512 TX descriptors and 512 RX descriptors vmx0: Using 8 RX queues 8 TX queues with optimizations: vmx0: Using 4096 TX descriptors and 2048 RX descriptors vmx0: Using 8 RX queues 8 TX queues vmx0: Using MSI-X interrupts with 9 vectors 2.5.1 mean: pf 2,15 Gbit/s / forwarding: 2,74 Gbit/s mean: pf 4,35 Gbit/s / forwarding: 5,48 Gbit/s mean: pf 7,42 Gbit/s / forwarding: 8,67 Gbit/s mean: pf 8,67 Gbit/s / forwarding: 8,61 Gbit/s The values are even a little bit slower.... Any other ideas ? I will crosscheck with freebsd 12-2. I have checkd Freebsd 12-2 and Freebsd 13-RC4 bare metal. Factor 2 and Freebsd 13 is much faster.