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

    Wireless slowdown after a few days on latest releases.

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Wireless
    16 Posts 6 Posters 7.9k 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.
    • H
      hoba
      last edited by

      Or maybe heat? are the units placed somwehere in the direct sunlight and/or it's more hot as it is summer?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        pcatiprodotnet
        last edited by

        Thanks for suggestions to check.
        It just started slowing again after running fine for ~5-6hrs, and I got this odd kernel message in the log (fyi, time is off)…

        Aug 10 03:14:35 dnsmasq[1037]: DHCPACK(ath1) 10.130.1.101 00:e0:98:e3:4f:e1 D7YMYK11
        Aug 10 03:15:26 kernel: rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3
        Aug 10 03:15:41 kernel: rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3rix 255 (0) bad ratekbps 0 mode 3
        Aug 10 03:15:57 kernel:
        Aug 10 03:15:57 kernel: arplookup 10.130.4.1 failed: host is not on local network

        I wasn't getting these kernel messages earlier when it was working fast.

        It doesn't appear that anything has changed in "top" from when it was fast; sometimes "system" goes up to 40% but not for long…

        last pid: 28510;  load averages:  0.21,  0.19,  0.17        up 0+05:15:26  03:22:04
        32 processes:  1 running, 31 sleeping
        CPU states:  2.7% user,  0.0% nice,  3.9% system,  3.9% interrupt, 89.5% idle
        Mem: 11M Active, 12M Inact, 17M Wired, 13M Buf, 76M Free
        Swap:

        PID USERNAME  THR PRI NICE  SIZE    RES STATE    TIME  WCPU COMMAND
        1038 root        1  8    0  1956K  1660K nanslp  6:56  0.98% olsrd
          993 root        1  8  20  1680K  1188K wait    0:15  0.00% sh
        7659 root        1  96    0  5592K  2612K select  0:13  0.00% sshd
        1097 root        1  8  20  1180K  564K nanslp  0:08  0.00% check_reload_status
          828 root        1  4    0  3252K  2364K kqread  0:06  0.00% lighttpd
        1037 nobody      1  96    0  1332K  1016K select  0:04  0.00% dnsmasq
        27650 root        1  96    0  2276K  1500K RUN      0:04  0.00% top
        1017 root        1  8  -88  1328K  796K nanslp  0:04  0.00% watchdogd
          833 root        1  8    0  8944K  4552K wait    0:02  0.00% php
          498 root        1 -58    0  3664K  1536K bpf      0:01  0.00% tcpdump
          248 root        1  96    0  1352K  984K select  0:01  0.00% syslogd
          946 proxy      1  4    0  656K  412K kqread  0:00  0.00% pftpx
        1019 root        1  8    0  1304K  984K nanslp  0:00  0.00% cron
          829 root        1  8    0  8944K  4552K wait    0:00  0.00% php
        7799 root        1  20    0  3928K  2532K pause    0:00  0.00% tcsh
        1103 root        1  8    0  1568K  1240K wait    0:00  0.00% login
        7692 root        1  8    0  1640K  1132K wait    0:00  0.00% sh

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

          Any idea what rix is?  Never heard of that..

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • P
            pcatiprodotnet
            last edited by

            It seems to run fast for ~5-8 hours, then gets sluggish for a few more hours, then reboots after that, like clockwork.
            Here is, presumably, a last "top" before it rebooted; It appears ok…

            last pid: 58198;  load averages:  0.08,  0.07,  0.07    up 0+14:26:31  17:55:56
            32 processes:  1 running, 31 sleeping
            CPU states:  1.9% user,  0.4% nice,  2.3% system,  3.1% interrupt, 92.3% idle
            Mem: 11M Active, 10M Inact, 16M Wired, 12M Buf, 79M Free
            Swap:

            PID USERNAME  THR PRI NICE  SIZE    RES STATE    TIME  WCPU COMMAND
            1038 root        1  8    0  2544K  2172K nanslp  19:25  1.12% olsrd
            1447 root        1  96    0  2332K  1556K RUN      5:19  0.00% top
              993 root        1  8  20  1740K  1248K wait    0:43  0.00% sh
            1426 root        1  96    0  5592K  2608K select  0:42  0.00% sshd
            1068 root        1  8  20  1180K  564K nanslp  0:21  0.00% check_reload_st
            1017 root        1  8  -88  1328K  796K nanslp  0:10  0.00% watchdogd
            1036 nobody      1  96    0  1332K  1016K select  0:06  0.00% dnsmasq
              828 root        1  4    0  3104K  2196K kqread  0:06  0.00% lighttpd
              498 root        1 -58    0  3664K  1536K bpf      0:04  0.00% tcpdump
              946 proxy      1  4    0  656K  412K kqread  0:01  0.00% pftpx
              248 root        1  96    0  1352K  984K select  0:01  0.00% syslogd
            1019 root        1  8    0  1304K  984K nanslp  0:01  0.00% cron
              833 root        1  8    0  8944K  4552K wait    0:00  0.00% php
              829 root        1  8    0  8944K  4564K wait    0:00  0.00% php
            1446 root        1  20    0  3924K  2524K pause    0:00  0.00% tcsh
            1075 root        1  8    0  1568K  1236K wait    0:00  0.00% login
            1430 root        1  8    0  1640K  1132K wait    0:00  0.00% sh

            What is the path+name of the system log file?  I could leave an ssh window open with "tail -f" on it.

            There is no difference FreeBSD wise....  Nothing has changed except pfSense code which would not be causing this.

            Ok.  I the only other difference I could think of is this unit has two Atheros based cards in it, all other production units have just one.  I've tested both cards individually, and they do both function for days.  However, you'll find this second card is likely unprecedented...
            http://www.ubnt.com/super_range9.php4

            Or maybe heat.

            It could be these two mini-pci wireless cards combined are generating too much heat.
            One is 400mW 2.4ghz, and the other is 700mW 900mhz card.  Although, after rebooting
            it does run smooth and fast again for ~5-8 more hours.

            Thank you for the help, -Pete

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • K
              KiFFuSeR
              last edited by

              @pcatiprodotnet:

              It could be these two mini-pci wireless cards combined are generating too much heat.
              One is 400mW 2.4ghz, and the other is 700mW 900mhz card.  Although, after rebooting
              it does run smooth and fast again for ~5-8 more hours.

              Can the WRAP handle the power requirements for those cards?

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

                That was my other thought, are the power supplies up to snuff'.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • P
                  pcatiprodotnet
                  last edited by

                  Can the WRAP handle the power requirements for those cards.
                  are the power supplies up to snuff.

                  If it's power, would turning down the wireless tx Power in the gui help?

                  Here are the PoE specs:

                  Switching Power Supply, 18v, 0.84a, 15w
                  http://www.netgate.com/product_info.php?cPath=24_55&products_id=258

                  Also,

                  The 400mW 2.4GHz mini-pci card…
                  http://www.netgate.com/product_info.php?cPath=26_34&products_id=279

                  The 700mW 900MHz mini-pci card...
                  http://www.ubnt.com/super_range9.php4

                  The WRAP.2C
                  http://www.netgate.com/product_info.php?products_id=241

                  [disclaimer: links provided for information; items were not necessarily purchased there]

                  [update]
                  I disabled Opt1 (the 900mhz card) interface, and it's been running smooth for 24hrs.
                  Next, I'll try a the same setup on different hardware, then I may resort 1 card per wrap.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • L
                    lsf
                    last edited by

                    uhm ,normally the cards use more power on lower speeds, and turning down power might mean lower speed.
                    So basically you could be shooting yourself by doing that.

                    SR-9 spec:

                    Current Consumption @3.3V

                    Transmit     
                    1-24 Mbps    1000mA, +/-100mA
                    36 Mbps        900mA, +/-100mA
                    48 Mbps        850mA, +/-100mA
                    54 Mbps        800mA, +/-100mA

                    Receive  400mA, +/-50mA

                    This is similar for most wireless cards, however the SR-9 consumes a lot of power.

                    -lsf

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • A
                      aldo
                      last edited by

                      total output of wrap with two wireless cards is about 22w
                      8watts real power from one atheros card
                      so if your usinf 400mw cards then you will be more

                      also make sure your bios is up to daye this can cause issues with minipci bus and atheroes cards

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • K
                        KiFFuSeR
                        last edited by

                        Even today, when AR5004x begins to be EOL, I still think cards like CM9 are the way to go. It's a shame that Atheros stop production of this wonderfull chipsets in flavour of the cheap AR5006x. I know i'll miss CM9 a lot…

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.