@smartcall Will do.

At present, given multiple young but out of warranty Netgate hardware of mine that are becoming unrecoverable the only reason I was buying Netgate hardware in the first place is no the case.

I run a TS128GMTE452T, but wiht UPS and RAM Disk.
Pfblocker drop xGB day if there is no RAM Disk.

@stephenw10 I had actually thought of doing a cross-compile from my ubuntu installation but it seemed too complicated to figure out how to compile it against FreeBSD headers and especially how to handle the hidapi library.

Had I thought of doing a FreeBSD install on a VM at the very beginning, then compiling the code on the VM before copying to the pfSense box, it probably would have been faster and easier overall.

@binhex01 I already have a 120mm fan attached. Idles around +- 25° so that can't be a problem. I've PMed you with an offtopic question.

@stephenw10

Indeed, so I try but it doesn't work

I build a freebsd VM and install the appropriate package to be able to compile...

I get the source https://github.com/Aquantia/aqtion-freebsd

But I get error:

usr/src/aqtion-freebsd-0.0.5/aq_main.c:197:57: error: too many arguments provided to function-like macro invocation
197 | DRIVER_MODULE(atlantic, pci, aq_driver, aq_devclass, 0, 0);
| ^
/usr/include/sys/bus.h:854:9: note: macro 'DRIVER_MODULE' defined here
854 | #define DRIVER_MODULE(name, busname, driver, evh, arg)
| ^
fatal error: too many errors emitted, stopping now [-ferror-limit=]

In the main the function put 5 arguments in the bus.h that function is only expecting 5 arguments.. mismatch

the code is not working properly

I study the C a long time ago (I'm old :-) ) and I never used after.

It's the Vendor and Product ID as reported by usbconfig:

[24.11-RELEASE][admin@6100.stevew.lan]/root: usbconfig -d ugen0.4 -v ugen0.4: <ME906s LTE M.2 Module Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.> at usbus0, cfg=0 md=HOST spd=HIGH (480Mbps) pwr=ON (2mA) ugen0.4.0: u3g0: <Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. HUAWEI Mobile, class 0/0, rev 2.10/1.02, addr 3> bLength = 0x0012 bDescriptorType = 0x0001 bcdUSB = 0x0210 bDeviceClass = 0x0000 <Probed by interface class> bDeviceSubClass = 0x0000 bDeviceProtocol = 0x00ff bMaxPacketSize0 = 0x0040 idVendor = 0x12d1 idProduct = 0x15c1 bcdDevice = 0x0102 iManufacturer = 0x0001 <Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.> iProduct = 0x0002 <HUAWEI Mobile> iSerialNumber = 0x0003 <0123456789ABCDEF> bNumConfigurations = 0x0003

@stephenw10

I have re-tested tonight and checked I have 0 collisions.

734ac97a-0fe7-4b84-bc7c-1fac7c85179e-image.png

The above is during the time I switched back to the 2.5GBE port and ran a test from my test machine. That is connected to a second 2.5GBE port.

I complete more testing ever later tonight or tomorrow morning and post my results.

@stephenw10

Thank you.

@stephenw10

Yes Ive tried;

different ports different cables different switches (net gear & unifi) updated firmware disabled sr-iov and i/oat in the bios just this morning I wiped pfsense and restored the configuration. Maybe the install was bad somehow.

Either the nic is bad or the server is. That's the only two things left that I can think of. I just hope it's the nic!

Thank you all for the feedback.

I suppose the discontinuation of the Plus upgrade for home labs was a financial one.

Bummer, I still say.

:)

We are using a 10G Broadcom P210TP with pfSense 2.7.2, no issue so far.

@andrew_cb said in Concerns and feedback about storage lifetime wearout on Netgate devices:

I've seen various mentions of needing to "take it easy" on the onboard eMMC. This is also mentioned on the documentation for some packages, but generally there are no guidelines on how much of an impact packages have on storage lifetime.

https://forum.netgate.com/topic/189820/how-do-i-find-out-what-write-continuously-on-my-pfsense-ssd/

@kenw as mentioned by @keyser even if you could shave off a few watts - is it worth the risk that might come with instability? Your not talking from going from 100w to 10w, lets say you could save 2 watts.

In the big picture at say 15 cents per kwh.. Do the math.. Your talking like $2.63 over the year..

And you might be below that or even if you were paying 50 cents a kwh your only talking $8.77 over the year..

This cost savings are in no way worth any effort even, or the risk of problems.

Now if you were talking say changing some hardware or whatever and went from 150W to 10 watts.. So a savings of like 180 dollars a year.. Hey such a savings might be worth even changing hardware - because you might recoup the cost of the new hardware in a few years.

Ah, nice. Yes some modems only support some variables there.

Ah, well it could be an error coming back from the server side then. I guess they have changed the allowed methods. Assuming your login is still valid.

If you have a CPU with QAT on-board then you might as well enable it. If you're considering adding QAT hardware then almost certainly not worth it IMO.

Quick update to anyone stumbling on this:
The reboots kept coming in an irregular way. What seemed to help was reducing the number of feeds for pfBlockerNG (even though memory did not seem to be the probelm). At some point I installed 24.11 RC and then 24.11 final. That seemed to finally do the trick: I had an uptime of some 9 days.

For me the issue is closed, since I recently upgraded to a SG-2100 that I was able to get for a good price. Interestingly even though memory never seemd to be the problem now I see the CPU also running at a lower average (.2 vs .5 before).

@coxhaus exactly - sure you can pick some older models for good prices on ebay, etc.. But yup loud and love to suck the electron juice ;)

Only way I could see running them is in a true lab, where they are only one while you actually lab something..

I just installed some older 3850's in a branch office - and kind of felt bad, you could hear them out in the office ;) But my boss said that's a facilities issue.. they can sound proof the room or move them to somewhere else in the office, but this is where they told us to install them.. And that is where all the current drops go too, etc.

@patient0 I would image yes, but my guess would be that you would see a very little return/difference in practice. Although I don’t really know the particulars of UFS’s behaviour, I’m guessing it will have almost the same tendencies as ZFS when used in pfSense.
In pfSense most/almost all of the diskwrites done over time is not overwrites of already allocated blocks within existing files, but rather appending blocks to an existing file (growing/rotating logfiles). So the filesystem should have a particular allocation preference to use previously allocated but now released blocks over new vanilla blocks. My guess is UFS like most other FS’s does not have such a preference/policy, and consequently it will slowly write to almost all FS blocks within the LUN.

Hmm, that does start to look like a NIC issue then if it fails the same way with the Linux driver.