@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.

Yup because the modules are now included. The device is recognised by default.

Quick follow up... I swapped the X710-T4L for an X550-T2 a little over 3 months ago and the system has been rock solid ever since. No problems at all. It seems it was either a bad NIC or a driver problem, unfortunately I'm not planning to test with a different X710 any time soon.

You have enabled all three WoL options? They likely need to be enabled at every boot.

Though the one device I have that always works with WoL uses an re NIC and doesn't require anything special in pfSense.

Stephen,

I was able to move the interface to the 10G port. Thanks for all of your help and pointing me in the right direction.

Scott

Hmm, well that sounds like the Netgear is internally untagging the VLANs from the SSIDs to it's own ports? Which implies it is somehow separating the traffic from the SSIDs at least.

Is it really not possible to have it just pass the tagged traffic?

You could use your switch to put them back on a single linked tagged but that seems like it should be unnecessary.

How many VLANs do you have? I think the ice driver includes support for hardware VLAN filtering and it has a limited number. It should switch to software filtering but fails.

Steve

It will probably work. The compatibility would all be down to the controller though the drive itself doesn't really matter.

You don't need anything like that for pfSense though. pfSense doesn't require a lot of storage or much by way of storage speed. And you can get an SSD new for less than that anyway.

Steve

What is it connected to? What state does that show for the link? How is it configured?

With a DAC cable you might have no connection options at all in pfSense. It will only connect at 10G autoselect.