Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    hoping for 10Gbps, getting sub 1Gbps speed Xeon E3-1270 v5 3.6GHz

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    37 Posts 8 Posters 4.8k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • stephenw10S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      Mmm, so likely those are the default values. There should be a description of each tunable if you run: sysctl -d dev.ql.0

      S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        SpaceBass @stephenw10
        last edited by SpaceBass

        @stephenw10 said in hoping for 10Gbps, getting sub 1Gbps speed Xeon E3-1270 v5 3.6GHz:

        sysctl -d dev.ql.0

        well that's a helpful command! thanks

        still not seeing anything about queues though :/

        dev.ql.0:
        dev.ql.0.wake: Device set to wake the system
        dev.ql.0.num_sds_rings: Number of Status Descriptor Rings
        dev.ql.0.num_rds_rings: Number of Rcv Descriptor Rings
        dev.ql.0.free_pkt_thres: Threshold for # of packets to free at a time
        dev.ql.0.snd_pkt_thres: Threshold for # of snd packets
        dev.ql.0.rcv_pkt_thres_d: Threshold for # of rcv pkts to trigger indication defered
        dev.ql.0.rcv_pkt_thres: Threshold for # of rcv pkts to trigger indication isr
        dev.ql.0.jumbo_replenish: Threshold for Replenishing Jumbo Frames
        dev.ql.0.std_replenish: Threshold for Replenishing Standard Frames
        dev.ql.0.debug: Debug Level
        dev.ql.0.fw_version: firmware version
        dev.ql.0.stats: Statistics
        dev.ql.0.%parent: parent device
        dev.ql.0.%pnpinfo: device identification
        dev.ql.0.%location: device location relative to parent
        dev.ql.0.%driver: device driver name
        dev.ql.0.%desc: device description
        

        Also, interesting, when I do an iperf3 with -R here's the top output on the pfSense box...

        CPU 0:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  1.9% system, 86.5% interrupt, 11.6% idle
        CPU 1:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice,  8.1% system,  2.7% interrupt, 88.8% idle
        CPU 2:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  5.8% system, 54.8% interrupt, 39.4% idle
        CPU 3:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice,  8.5% system,  6.6% interrupt, 84.6% idle
        CPU 4:  0.8% user,  0.0% nice, 25.9% system,  6.2% interrupt, 67.2% idle
        CPU 5:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice, 21.6% system,  7.3% interrupt, 70.7% idle
        CPU 6:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice,  0.8% system, 51.4% interrupt, 47.5% idle
        CPU 7:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice,  5.4% system,  8.9% interrupt, 85.3% idle
        Mem: 305M Active, 201M Inact, 872M Wired, 14G Free
        ARC: 404M Total, 63M MFU, 336M MRU, 32K Anon, 1218K Header, 3853K Other
             122M Compressed, 283M Uncompressed, 2.31:1 Ratio
        Swap: 1024M Total, 1024M Free
        
          PID USERNAME    PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE    C   TIME    WCPU COMMAND
           12 root        -92    -     0B   528K CPU0     0   0:32  90.84% [intr{irq265: ql0}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU1     1  45:28  87.99% [idle{idle: cpu1}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU7     7  45:32  86.71% [idle{idle: cpu7}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU3     3  45:28  83.73% [idle{idle: cpu3}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K RUN      5  45:17  71.47% [idle{idle: cpu5}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU4     4  45:15  70.76% [idle{idle: cpu4}]
           12 root        -92    -     0B   528K CPU2     2   0:24  60.84% [intr{irq266: ql0}]
            0 root        -92    -     0B  1376K -        6   0:31  54.00% [kernel{ql1 txq}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K RUN      6  44:26  48.31% [idle{idle: cpu6}]
           12 root        -92    -     0B   528K WAIT     6   0:49  43.46% [intr{irq268: ql1}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K RUN      2  44:57  37.84% [idle{idle: cpu2}]
           12 root        -92    -     0B   528K WAIT     6   0:49  23.37% [intr{irq264: ql0}]
           11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K RUN      0  45:02  12.88% [idle{idle: cpu0}]
            0 root        -92    -     0B  1376K -        7   0:07  12.82% [kernel{ql0 rcvq}]
            0 root        -92    -     0B  1376K -        1   0:12   5.35% [kernel{ql1 rcvq}]
        99487 avahi        20    0    13M  4500K select   5   0:06   2.82% avahi-daemon: running [washington.local]
           12 root        -92    -     0B   528K WAIT     4   0:20   2.34% [intr{irq267: ql0}]
            0 root        -92    -     0B  1376K -        1   0:11   1.83% [kernel{ql0 txq}]
        
        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • stephenw10S
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by

          Well at least 4 IRQs for ql0 there. Does vmstat -i show those?

          Nothing about queues there I agree. That's the sort of setting that would usually be a loader value though. Those are usually shown in hw.ql but only values that are set are shown.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • S
            SpaceBass
            last edited by

            @stephenw10

            Intel X520-da2 update

            tl;dr better performance for sure, but still not 10Gbps. 8 CPU cores, each NIC using 4 queues.

            I'm increasingly of the opinion that even with a beefy CPU pfSense just doesnt like doing 10Gbps 😂

            iperf3
            iperf3 -c ISP's server -P 10

            [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  5.64 GBytes  4.84 Gbits/sec  1455             sender
            [SUM]   0.00-10.03  sec  5.63 GBytes  4.82 Gbits/sec                  receiver
            

            iperf3 -c ISP's server -P 10 -R

            [SUM]   0.00-10.03  sec  5.18 GBytes  4.43 Gbits/sec  4033             sender
            [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  5.14 GBytes  4.42 Gbits/sec                  receiver
            

            iperf3 -c local server on other vLAN -P 18

            [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  5.40 GBytes  4.64 Gbits/sec  11944             sender
            [SUM]   0.00-10.01  sec  5.39 GBytes  4.62 Gbits/sec                  receiver
            

            top

            last pid: 52809;  load averages:  0.71,  0.41,  0.36                             up 0+00:28:16  16:09:59
            742 threads:   10 running, 699 sleeping, 33 waiting
            CPU 0:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice, 31.1% system,  0.0% interrupt, 68.9% idle
            CPU 1:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt,  100% idle
            CPU 2:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice,  3.9% system,  0.0% interrupt, 95.7% idle
            CPU 3:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice,  0.4% system,  0.0% interrupt, 99.2% idle
            CPU 4:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice, 75.2% system,  0.0% interrupt, 24.8% idle
            CPU 5:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice,  0.0% system,  0.0% interrupt, 99.6% idle
            CPU 6:  0.4% user,  0.0% nice, 75.6% system,  0.0% interrupt, 24.0% idle
            CPU 7:  0.0% user,  0.0% nice,  0.4% system,  0.0% interrupt, 99.6% idle
            Mem: 297M Active, 178M Inact, 920M Wired, 14G Free
            ARC: 384M Total, 53M MFU, 326M MRU, 32K Anon, 1086K Header, 3216K Other
                 118M Compressed, 268M Uncompressed, 2.27:1 Ratio
            Swap: 1024M Total, 1024M Free
            
              PID USERNAME    PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE    C   TIME    WCPU COMMAND
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU7     7  27:56  99.89% [idle{idle: cpu7}]
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU5     5  27:55  99.73% [idle{idle: cpu5}]
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU3     3  27:56  99.16% [idle{idle: cpu3}]
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU1     1  27:55  99.14% [idle{idle: cpu1}]
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K RUN      2  26:31  95.65% [idle{idle: cpu2}]
                0 root        -76    -     0B  1376K -        6   1:13  78.85% [kernel{if_io_tqg_6}]
                0 root        -76    -     0B  1376K CPU4     4   1:16  72.63% [kernel{if_io_tqg_4}]
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K RUN      0  26:34  69.36% [idle{idle: cpu0}]
                0 root        -76    -     0B  1376K -        0   1:27  30.30% [kernel{if_io_tqg_0}]
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K RUN      4  26:34  27.30% [idle{idle: cpu4}]
               11 root        155 ki31     0B   128K CPU6     6  26:57  21.08% [idle{idle: cpu6}]
                0 root        -76    -     0B  1376K -        2   1:40   3.32% [kernel{if_io_tqg_2}]
            67535 unbound      20    0   107M    54M kqread   4   0:02   0.40% /usr/local/sbin/unbound -c /var/unbox
            

            dmesg

            root: dmesg | grep queues
            ix0: Using 4 RX queues 4 TX queues
            ix0: allocated for 4 queues
            ix0: allocated for 4 rx queues
            ix0: netmap queues/slots: TX 4/2048, RX 4/2048
            ix1: Using 4 RX queues 4 TX queues
            ix1: allocated for 4 queues
            ix1: allocated for 4 rx queues
            ix1: netmap queues/slots: TX 4/2048, RX 4/2048
            
            O 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • O
              ogghi @SpaceBass
              last edited by

              @spacebass
              Pretty exactly the same on my end. I will now try to get in touch with our ISP again to make sure it's not their core router being the culprit here!

              https://www.reddit.com/r/PFSENSE/comments/137iv07/comment/jj6oqw4/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Cool_CoronaC
                Cool_Corona
                last edited by Cool_Corona

                Are you guys using SATA on your hardware??

                Remember there is a 6gbit/s limit to that when writing to the disk sybsystem.

                And I bet that is what you see.

                IN short... your NIC is pushing the limits of the disk subsystem.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • O
                  ogghi
                  last edited by

                  It is, but pFsense should not write data to disk while transferring?!
                  Or better, not the data it is routing through!

                  Cool_CoronaC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • Cool_CoronaC
                    Cool_Corona @ogghi
                    last edited by

                    @ogghi But youre downloading a file to test IPERF. Guess where that is written?

                    S S 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      SpaceBass @Cool_Corona
                      last edited by

                      @cool_corona if that were the case, hosts on the same network would also be bottlenecked.

                      Cool_CoronaC O 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • S
                        SteveITS Galactic Empire @Cool_Corona
                        last edited by

                        @cool_corona Don’t run speed tests on pfSense if at all possible, use a host behind it. Then it (also) isn’t using CPU cycles on the test.

                        Pre-2.7.2/23.09: Only install packages for your version, or risk breaking it. Select your branch in System/Update/Update Settings.
                        When upgrading, allow 10-15 minutes to restart, or more depending on packages and device speed.
                        Upvote 👍 helpful posts!

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • Cool_CoronaC
                          Cool_Corona @SpaceBass
                          last edited by

                          @spacebass Why?? doesnt pass through pfsense?

                          R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • R
                            rcoleman-netgate Netgate @Cool_Corona
                            last edited by

                            @cool_corona It's a single NIC route. If you want to test throughput you should test the THROUGH part of it

                            Ryan
                            Repeat, after me: MESH IS THE DEVIL! MESH IS THE DEVIL!
                            Requesting firmware for your Netgate device? https://go.netgate.com
                            Switching: Mikrotik, Netgear, Extreme
                            Wireless: Aruba, Ubiquiti

                            Cool_CoronaC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • Cool_CoronaC
                              Cool_Corona @rcoleman-netgate
                              last edited by

                              @rcoleman-netgate

                              Hardware

                              pfSense box

                              Dell R230 Xeon E3-1270 v5 @ 3.6GHz
                              16GB
                              2x Samsung 850 SSD in ZFS redundant pool
                              HP NC523SPF NIC in PCIe port 2 (which I believe is full 16 lanes)
                              

                              switches & cables & optics

                              unifi aggregation 10G switches
                              Intel 850mm SFP+ optics
                              mm patch cables (same ones used to get faster results with 6100)
                              

                              Testing
                              iperf3:
                              iperf3 -c server.fqdn.foo.bar -P 10
                              iperf3 -c server.fqdn.foo.bar -P 10 -R
                              iperf3 -c server.fqdn.foo.bar -P 10 -6

                              As I see it, when tested on LAN the traffic never reaches pfsense.

                              Its only throughput on pfsense thats the issue and could be disk subsystem related on the pfsense hardware if offloading is disabled.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • stephenw10S
                                stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                last edited by

                                Hmm, I wouldn't expect anything to be written to disk there unless something is misconfigured, somehow using swap maybe. You should see that in iostat if it was though.
                                It's clearly not a CPU limit with those numbers. No core is close to 100%.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • O
                                  ogghi @SpaceBass
                                  last edited by

                                  @spacebass exatly that's what I am doing, using a host behind!

                                  S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • S
                                    SpaceBass @ogghi
                                    last edited by

                                    @ogghi for what it’s worth, I determined those HP NICs just aren’t great in FreeBSD. It’s unclear how many queues they use and the driver doesn’t seem to support any kind of manual or dynamic assignment.

                                    I moved to an intel NIC in that same box and am now getting closer to 8Gbps.

                                    O 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                    • O
                                      ogghi @SpaceBass
                                      last edited by

                                      @spacebass To be sure our provider actually will change their core router in our office, let's see. Maybe it's not our pFsense' issue after all xD

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • J
                                        JimBob Indiana
                                        last edited by

                                        “Make sure you have multiple queues in attached for each NIC.”

                                        And how do we do that?

                                        S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • S
                                          SpaceBass @JimBob Indiana
                                          last edited by

                                          @jimbob-indiana said in hoping for 10Gbps, getting sub 1Gbps speed Xeon E3-1270 v5 3.6GHz:

                                          And how do we do that?

                                          what I think I've learned is it both NIC and driver dependent. For instance, now that I've moved to an Intel NIC, at boot (via dmesg) I can see that the system automatically assigns tx and rx queues based on the number of CPU cores I have.

                                          On the HP NC523SFP NIC's driver, there does not seem to be any way to set or have the system manually assign queues.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                          • stephenw10S
                                            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                            last edited by

                                            Most NICs will enable multiple queues by default if it's possible. You will usually see 1Rx and 1Tx queue per CPU core up to a limit defined by the NIC chip. Usually 4 or 8.
                                            However some NICs will use 1 queue by default, notably vmx, and most can be configured to use just one or might be detecting something incorrectly. So if you see poor throughput you should check so see how many queues are in use. Most drivers report it in the boot log.

                                            ix0: <Intel(R) X553 N (SFP+)> mem 0x80400000-0x805fffff,0x80604000-0x80607fff at device 0.0 on pci9
                                            ix0: Using 2048 TX descriptors and 2048 RX descriptors
                                            ix0: Using 8 RX queues 8 TX queues
                                            ix0: Using MSI-X interrupts with 9 vectors
                                            ix0: allocated for 8 queues
                                            ix0: allocated for 8 rx queues
                                            ix0: Ethernet address: 00:08:a2:12:e2:ca
                                            ix0: eTrack 0x8000084b PHY FW V65535
                                            ix0: netmap queues/slots: TX 8/2048, RX 8/2048
                                            
                                            S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.