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

    Which Version To Install - Read the versions page, need clarification.

    General pfSense Questions
    4
    6
    1.6k
    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.
    • T
      Technyne
      last edited by

      I've put together a system for PFSense that will utilize a 30GB mSATA SSD Drive but I am unclear on which is the best version for this use.

      I've read that perhaps "flashing" the drive with an embedded version is a wiser idea than simply installing it to this drive from lets say an ISO.

      Can someone provide a little more clarity on which version would be the most correct version to use? This appliance will thrown against a network with no less than 300 active ports, with 30+ VLans and a 35Mbps Fiber internet connection

      Additionally, what is the maximum number of interfaces PFSense can utilize?

      Thank you in advance.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • D
        dhatz
        last edited by

        If you plan to add 3rd party packages (snort, squid etc) you probably want to install the full version i.e. pfSense-2.0-RELEASE-i386.iso.gz rather than the embedded.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • M
          Metu69salemi
          last edited by

          but another hand, if you're afraid of hdd wearing out, then nano is better solution.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • T
            Technyne
            last edited by

            @dhatz:

            If you plan to add 3rd party packages (snort, squid etc) you probably want to install the full version i.e. pfSense-2.0-RELEASE-i386.iso.gz rather than the embedded.

            I am not sure any of these will be required, do the nano versions not support these plugins?

            @Metu69salemi:

            but another hand, if you're afraid of hdd wearing out, then nano is better solution.

            how heavily is the drive utilized with the full version vs. the Nano Version?

            Thanks again for you replies.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • M
              Metu69salemi
              last edited by

              i think that squid is quite heavy addon for the disk

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • F
                focalguy
                last edited by

                @Technyne:

                @Metu69salemi:

                but another hand, if you're afraid of hdd wearing out, then nano is better solution.

                how heavily is the drive utilized with the full version vs. the Nano Version?

                Thanks again for you replies.

                In nano, the whole system is loaded into RAM and run from there with writes to the disk only happening when configuration is saved.

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