I'm sure on the branding terms, I've heard that some of the higher end Sandisk and such use the same type of memory, but I'm not sure how you'd tell for sure.

I've been buying InnoDisk iCF4000 modules from these guys: http://www.memorydepot.com/ssd.asp

I would ask before hand for an excuse to open up this issue again, but that I have a problem here in this area and has a solution, but I can not find it.

I have a ProLiant DL 160 server, but can not install pfsense 1.2.3 RC1, the problem is that the installation was paralyzed, not moving, it stays in this instruction …
p4tcc3: <cpu frequency="" thermal="" control="">on cpu3
and fails to menu</cpu>

the source on the cdrom is ver. 1.2.2 :
#define DRIVER_VERSION_STRING  "1.2.2"
#define DRIVER_VENDOR          "Agere Systems, http://www.agere.com"
#define DRIVER_BUILD_DATE      "01/31/2006 15:40:00"
#define DRIVER_DESC            "10/100/1000 Base-T Ethernet Driver"
–
The vertion in linux -kernel is from this project :
http://dadams1969.googlepages.com/et131xkernelmodule

So you see the main code base is from 2006/5 !! (what is my cdrom)
that would not help any  ::)

Hello!

For me, FX5621 doesn't work …

Please, see at:

http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,16898.msg88743.html#msg88743

Regards,

Josep Pujadas

I've been very happy with it.  It's compact, runs on 12v, and has plenty of CPU.  I've been able to push 30MB/s between 2 of the interfaces with no problems.  No special setup was needed.  I just installed 1.2.3-rc2 on a CF card and booted it.  The only out of the norm thing I've done is a few tweaks to get CPU power management running.  If you are in a decently ventilated area (i.e. not an enclosed cabinet inside a wall like my install), then you shouldn't need to worry about it.  The machine is a bit on the pricy side, but well worth the money if you want to do >100Mbps.

Thanks for the link, the latest snapshot (pfSense-1.2.3-20090615-1722.img.gz) worked great for me.

Ill eventually have to get a serial port attached for bios updates, but atleast I can play with it for the time being!

Cheers

Slam

@fstab
/dev/da0s1a            /cache0        ufs    rw,noatime      0      1
#/dev/ad1              /cache1        ufs    rw,noatime      0      1

you may also need to add some script to check that drive for consistency.

for some kind of fail over or improper shutdown other drive need to be scanned and mount.
If cache0 is the cache_dir /cache0
you need to edit also the squid.sh

#!/bin/sh # This file was automatically generated # by the pfSense service handler. rc_start() { if [ -z "`ps auxw | grep "[s]quid -D"|awk '{print $2}'`" ];then         if [ ! -d "/cache0/00" ];then                 if [ -z "`ps auxw | grep "fsck_ufs -y /cache0"`" ];then                 fsck -y /cache0                 fi         mount -a         fi         /usr/local/sbin/squid -D fi } rc_stop() {         /usr/local/sbin/squid -k shutdown # Just to be sure... sleep 5 killall -9 squid 2>/dev/null killall pinger 2>/dev/null } case $1 in         start)                 rc_start                 ;;         stop)                 rc_stop                 ;;         restart)                 rc_stop                 rc_start                 ;; esac

Out of curiosity, how would on board pci-e be comparatively to dual gig on board?

@covert:

Is my speed limit simply not enough resources in the system ? I find it hard to belive the dd-wrt router with a 216Mhz CPU and 32Meg ram can out perform it.

In some work loads a faster CPU may actually be a disadvantage.  Here's why. Interrupts are a high overhead activity: not only does the previous context have to be saved and restored but the cache can be trashed by high interrupt rates. You may have an application running. That application has high locality of memory reference so that most of its memory accesses are satisfied from the cache. An interrupt happens and for a while most of the memory references for the interrupt handler can't be satisfied from the cache but from much slower main memory. By the time the interrupt handler returns there may be very little of the application's memory in the cache so when the application runs again the cache gets refiled with application data and code.

If there is a heavy network load and the CPU is fast enough that it generally processes only one frame per interrupt then the cache related overhead will be considerably higher than it would be on a CPU that was somewhat slower and consequently processed more frames per interrupt.

Some NICs have a mechanism allowing the device driver to specify that interrupt requests should be delayed some short time to increase the likelihood that there will be multiple frames available for processing by the interrupt handler.

You don't say what NIC is in your system so I can't comment on whether it has that interrupt delay capability.

Some people have found that enabling polling (from the web GUI, System -> Advanced, check the box Use device polling in the Miscellaneous section) produces a considerable improvement in throughput. (This comes with a cost of a somewhat increased latency but the increase should generally be no more than about 1 mS and will often be much less).

It just keeps going up and down…up and down.  Thankfully I found the receipt and will probably return it since nobody seems to have a solution.

You where tryng that with a software raid.  I would actually get a raid controller that is support by freebsd and connect the disks to that controller.  It would be much faster at that point.  Also if a drive should fail the controller is going to be making a beeping sound and you connect to the bios of the controller and see exactly which disk has failed.

Software RAID is much sower in comparision to hardware RAID.
RC

Well. I ended up going back to linux and maxing out at around 80 megabits. Unfortunately i started having a very similar problem to what I originally had where certain sites and stuff wouldn't work. It was related the MTU. I originally had it set at 1492 and later changing it to 1454 fixed the issue but then it started having problems even at 1454. Certain sites and stuff wouldn't load. I need the connection to be reliable and linux was slightly lower latency so I switched back to linux.

thanks Cry Havok

i will do it at night and post the result (i hope it will recognize it)

rog

@jahonix:

@kc8apf:

I recently bought a Lanner FW-7520 for my house.

Which version did you choose: 600MHz or 1GHz and how much did it cost?

There are actually 3 versions:

FW-7520A - 600Mhz Celeron M
FW-7520B - 1Ghz Celeron M with no cache
FW-7520C - 1Ghz Celeron M with cache

I bought the FW-7520B directly from Lanner USA.  The cost as of March 29, 2009 was $430 + tax + S/H.  I had tried to get the FW-7520C originally, but it wasn't immediately available.  Being an OEM device, they wanted to sell to me in quantity and give me a price break.  I told them it was for a custom application and they happily sold me quantity 1.

I must agree that the provider is giving you such high bandwidth w/ such a setup is to prevent people from aggregating the bandwidth. You can use separate gateways for each wan.  Several years ago, I've seen it done on a clarckconnect setup, until they started charging a subscription for such features.  They just package a bunch of other people's "hard work/ingenuity" into a very nice gui and charge quite a bit for.  I believe it's based on Centos/Redhat/Linux.  It's quite reliable, I've been told.  You might wanna check it out.

It will only be used as a Firewall/Router… maybe with a WiFi card in it.
No VPN or anything like that.

The Hardware Compatibility List can be found here, from the front page of the pfSense web site.  It looks like the NFE driver may support the RTL8211B chipset.

Your other solution would be to get a mini-itx board with a 4x PCI-e slot and a dual port Intel Server grade NIC.  That should allow you to "make do" with a lower spec CPU, possibly an Atom based board.