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

    VMWare Pentest lab: Extremely high CPU on host

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Virtualization
    85 Posts 29 Posters 75.6k 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.
    • S
      Supermule Banned
      last edited by

      I am not. I only use 10Gbit internally and use the build-in 1Gbit for PF WAN.

      No directpath, but virtualized through VmWare.

      :)

      I am running the 32bit version of Pfsense and VM version 7.

      2vCPU and 1GB of memory. 11% memory used at the moment and 37% disk.

      @Veni:

      @Supermule:

      Use IBM X3550M4 with Intel 10GbE cars X520-T2.

      If you are running at 10 Gbit/s uplink, do you use DirectPath I/O with the pNIC's to pfSense or do you virtualize them to pfSense?
      Otherwise the platform is a more current generation than mine.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • J
        jp141
        last edited by

        Are people still having this issue with the latest esxi 5.1?

        I am running 4.1 at the moment and basically any sort of large download kills access to every VM running on the host until it is complete! :(

        I have tried everything I can think of and is listed on here, I am getting it on all versions of pfsense from 1.2.3 up to the latest.

        It has got to the point now, I am either going to have to setup Pfsense on some dedicated hardware or switch to monowall but I really need openvpn :(

        So is upgrading to esxi 5.1 a fix for this?

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S
          Supermule Banned
          last edited by

          Try to limit the download bandwidth. ;)

          Currently seeing ~2% CPU on the ESXi host on 2.0.3 REL.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • J
            jp141
            last edited by

            I have tried that, even if I limit to 20 meg it still plays havoc :(

            What version of ESX are you on?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              Supermule Banned
              last edited by

              4.1 U3.

              Dont want to upgrade to 5.x since I dont need the new features in 5.x.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • J
                jp141
                last edited by

                Looks like my only option is to move to hardware in that case :(

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  Supermule Banned
                  last edited by

                  When use to running vm's then hardware is a pain in the ass…. :(

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • J
                    jp141
                    last edited by

                    I know there are going to be vlans everywhere but what else can I do, I cant get any version of pfsense to play nice.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      Supermule Banned
                      last edited by

                      Have you tried 1.2.3?? Just for testing?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • J
                        jp141
                        last edited by

                        Yes I got exactly the same, the problem is as everyone is accessing the environment via ipsec tunnels or the ssl vpn all it takes is for one user to do a download and everyone's sessions jump about or die totally :(

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • S
                          Supermule Banned
                          last edited by

                          Have you read this?

                          http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/VPN_Capability_IPsec

                          No overlapping networks….

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • J
                            jp141
                            last edited by

                            Yeah deffo no overlapping networks

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • S
                              Supermule Banned
                              last edited by

                              Allright :) Do you have a 4.x vmware test platform??

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • J
                                jp141
                                last edited by

                                Yeah

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • S
                                  Supermule Banned
                                  last edited by

                                  Can you test there to see if its a 5.x issue then?

                                  Rather keep it in a VM than on physical hardware for the flexibility :)

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • J
                                    jp141
                                    last edited by

                                    Yeah I am willing to give that a go, but I need to drive a way to the DC to do the upgrade that's why I was asking if anyone had tried it, I didn't want a wasted trip :)

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • J
                                      jp141
                                      last edited by

                                      Nope the upgrade to 5.1 U1 didnt fix it :(

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • S
                                        Supermule Banned
                                        last edited by

                                        Try the 4.1 instead.

                                        It could be interesting to see if its a 5.x issue.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • J
                                          jp141
                                          last edited by

                                          I was on 4.1, I just went to 5.1 :)

                                          Its not as bad with 5.1 and 5.1 seems to manage the cpus much better all machines are using less but it is still unusable :(

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • S
                                            Supermule Banned
                                            last edited by

                                            Hmmmm that is pretty weird!!

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