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

    Fresh install WebConfigurator hangs

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Problems Installing or Upgrading pfSense Software
    12 Posts 4 Posters 5.1k 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
      Hans-Maier
      last edited by

      Hi dogbait,

      have the same problem with the MBUF which is at 100%.
      And the other thing is that igb1 does not come up with the message:
        "igb1: Could not setup receive structures"

      I already had a look on a BSD-forum entry from 2010 (four years old)
        http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2010-October/059534.html

      which says that I could modify the value for num_queues in if_igb.c which is really weired.

      Is there no solution for this? This makes the whole thing really unusable!

      PLEASE HELP me!

      Thanx!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • H
        Hans-Maier
        last edited by

        The fastest solution for me was to enter the BIOS and
          LIMIT the CPU kernels to 4!

        WTH is this? It works fine now …
        leaving me with 4 unused cores!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • JeGrJ
          JeGr LAYER 8 Moderator
          last edited by

          Hi Hans,

          as you have igb interfaces, can you try this:

          login to pfSense with SSH and edit the file (via vi) "/boot/loader.conf.local" (or open the file via Diagnostic menu). Then give it the following content:

          
          kern.ipc.nmbclusters="655356"
          machdep.hyperthreading_allowed="1"
          hw.igb.num_queues="4"
          
          

          and try to reboot. Does it help?

          Don't forget to upvote 👍 those who kindly offered their time and brainpower to help you!

          If you're interested, I'm available to discuss details of German-speaking paid support (for companies) if needed.

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

            The recommended settings are different from those:

            https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Tuning_and_Troubleshooting_Network_Cards#Intel_igb.284.29_and_em.284.29_Cards

            Do you have reason to use those?

            Also: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=69486
            Steve

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • JeGrJ
              JeGr LAYER 8 Moderator
              last edited by

              Because they work for us. ;)

              We had initial issues even installing pfSense 2.0.x on our brand new ibm hardware servers and intel/broadcast nics. We couldn't even get it to install nor to recognize the nics in the system because the cpu (8cores) had HT and the number of cores available to the system drew the mbufs into crazyness :)

              Those recommendations came from an older redmine bug. See: https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1221#note-8

              Greets

              Don't forget to upvote 👍 those who kindly offered their time and brainpower to help you!

              If you're interested, I'm available to discuss details of German-speaking paid support (for companies) if needed.

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

                Ah, yes. However note that in the bug report that setting was tested with a uniprocessor kernel and hyperthreading disabled. The current kernels are all SMP.
                If it works for you though then that's really what matters. So you tested these settings with 16 logical CPUs?

                Steve

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

                  OK…so what's the consensus. Our pfSense box has 8 CPU cores, one onboard i354 Intel Network Controller with 4 ports and one PCIe Intel VT Quad Network Controller with 4 ports...

                  Do we disable 4 cores AND set hw.igb.num_queues to 4 or 1?

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

                    You shouldn't need to disable any cores though 8 cores probably won't give you much advantage over 4 in 2.1.X. The new pf in 2.2 will use multiple cores much better.
                    I would go with JeGr's suggested settings since they have been tested to work with similar cores/ports.

                    Steve

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • JeGrJ
                      JeGr LAYER 8 Moderator
                      last edited by

                      As we re-used some similar hardware, we switched two cpus to other cluster members. So ATM our pair of firewalls are only running a single cpu with 4 cores and HT. So 8 visible to the system at the moment (as PF isn't using SMB now but hopefully will scale much better with FreeBSD 10.x underneath).  But our settings are still the same.

                      So yes we tested originally with 16 visible cores, now have 8 and the system is running good so far. MBUF usage is about 5% (31638/655356) and all of the 8 igb seem fine wether they run single (as igbX interface) or in a LAGG group.

                      Greets
                      Jens

                      Don't forget to upvote 👍 those who kindly offered their time and brainpower to help you!

                      If you're interested, I'm available to discuss details of German-speaking paid support (for companies) if needed.

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

                        Thanks guys, appreciate the info.

                        Just to add, I reduced the available cores in the BIOS from 8 to 4 and the MBUF utilization went from 100% to 50%.

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