HFSC Shaping wizard: speed never reaching limits ("missing" bandwidth)?
-
IMHO the wizard is only useful to provide a basic view into how the shaper might be configured.
If it doesn't work for you it doesn't work for you.
HFSC shaping is not for the faint of heart.
That said, it does work if configured properly.
-
HFSC is not hard, I don't know why people think it's confusing. It does have advanced features, just don't use them. The hardest part of HFSC is that people keep saying it's hard, then start off explaining the advanced parts.
I can't wait for CAKE. Then you just set the bandwidth, nothing more. No child queues, no queue sizes. The only possible options will be the RTT option to tune for your typical latency.
-
HFSC is not hard, I don't know why people think it's confusing.
Because nobody has managed to document the thing so that everyone can easily understand it. Toastman's guide is probably the best I've seen, and I find it lacking.
-
I could try to write a non-official guide kind of as experiment. HFSC works well for me, but my Internet connection is seemingly exceptional and could mask some of my mistakes. My personal pet peeve is that when something works, people rarely come back to mention that. They just complain when things aren't working, you have them try something, and you never hear from them again. Did it work?
-
My biggest issue with grokking HFSC is all of the variables and how they interrelate, and which ones are mandatory versus optionals. Most guides talk about everything theoretically, whereas I would be much better off with a series of empirical examples with Q&A to handle the edge/corner cases. I can't help but notice that Traffic Shaping has been conspicuously absent from the monthly hangouts, and that's a shame as I believe such a hangout would help a lot of people.
If you want to tackle a guide, I would be more then happy to proof it and ask lots of silly questions.
-
I know that I have played with PRIQ and other shapers and for what I use it for , HFSC works out the best for me. Granted my needs for it are unique but you could take my config and look at it and tweak it for your use or application purposes.
You can talk theory all you want but the best way to get used to using a shaper is to be able to put it into practice and try things out , changing a setting at a time and see what the results are. Does it take time , yes but it will yield a better result.
I feel that a lot of people come here looking for the magic bullet that will solve all their problems and are not willing to put in the work necessary to figure it out on their own. People like KOM , Nullity , Harvey66, Derelict answer questions in here and ask for specifics and try and help people out as best they can.
When your posting a question be sure to post specifics and use screenshots (Windows has this free Snipping tool that works great) , document your setup and how you are reproducing the results. Help them help you.
I know I haven't upgraded my PFSense past 2.2.1 right now and that is what I run as a "gold" level with my HFSC. Just my 2 cents.
-
Granted my needs for it are unique but you could take my config and look at it and tweak it for your use
That depends on the person knowing what the heck they're doing :D
You can talk theory all you want but the best way to get used to using a shaper is to be able to put it into practice and try things out
This is easy to say but not so easy in practice. Creating a virtual lab is simple, but then having clients simulating different traffic types and creating contention is where it gets tricky. Having a live LAN that you can diddle with without upsetting users is very hard to find.
I feel that a lot of people come here looking for the magic bullet that will solve all their problems and are not willing to put in the work necessary to figure it out on their own.
I believe that they shouldn't have to. Having the requisite base knowledge is mandatory of course, but some stuff you shouldn't need to know all of the ins & outs. People know what they want, but they don't know how to do it and that's a reflection of the GUI. The wizard helps a lot, but it's pretty basic in my opinion. I don't help very much in this particular forum after it became apparent to me that I don't really know what I'm talking about so I should stop talking.
-
For hfsc, the range is 0 to 7. The default is 1. Hfsc queues with a higher priority are preferred in the case of overload.
Having language like that in the shaper config page when priority means nothing to HFSC doesn't help.
-
@KOM:
I feel that a lot of people come here looking for the magic bullet that will solve all their problems and are not willing to put in the work necessary to figure it out on their own.
I believe that they shouldn't have to. Having the requisite base knowledge is mandatory of course, but some stuff you shouldn't need to know all of the ins & outs. People know what they want, but they don't know how to do it and that's a reflection of the GUI. The wizard helps a lot, but it's pretty basic in my opinion. I don't help very much in this particular forum after it became apparent to me that I don't really know what I'm talking about so I should stop talking.
Exactly. My whole point here is that I simply ran the shaper wizard, provided my upstream & downstream bandwidth, checked some of the boxes, and it's not working as I expect (i.e. "correctly"). This makes it seem like something is wrong, either with the shaper wizard or with the software itself. If the wizard is truly only meant as a "guideline" and some tweaking is not only expected but required, that needs to be made much more clear, and possibly stop calling it a "wizard."
More concerning to me is that I had a previous HFSC shaper config in place that never interfered with speed in the past, but then after an upgrade (unfortunately not sure which one), it started impacting traffic, and clearing that config (Which was also wizard-generated in an earlier version of pfSense) and then adding a new one still continued to exhibit the problem.
-
This problem is not common. There is nothing to fix (unless you can get enough information and submit a proper bug report).
I do not mean to seem insensitive or accusatory but I commonly encounter problems with software that are not common/well-documented and I must find a work-around myself. You may need to do this. Personally I consider this an everday part of using any software (especially free software).
Just saying "it's broken" is no help to developers. They need detailed bug reports.
-
This problem is not common. There is nothing to fix (unless you can get enough information and submit a proper bug report).
I do not mean to seem insensitive or accusatory but I commonly encounter problems with software that are not common/well-documented and I must find a work-around myself. You may need to do this. Personally I consider this an everday part of using any software.
Just saying "it's broken" is no help to developers. They need detailed bug reports.
I need a suggestion of what to collect / log in order to prove that something is wrong, as I asked earlier.
I just watched Diagnostics : Queues and nothing looked amiss - there were some "drops" showing but not a huge number.
Here's a Pastie link with both the Shaper config and all of my firewall rules (you can see my setup is pretty basic, most of the rules are from the shaper wizard!)
Note that I purposefully used higher bandwidth values than my connection is rated for, to see if it would improve the test at all. (When I test without any shaper config, I'll show ~36Mbps downstream and ~6Mbps upstream, even though the connection is only rated for 30 / 5.)
-
@bradenmcg:
I need a suggestion of what to collect / log in order to prove that something is wrong, as I asked earlier.
Google how to submit a proper bug report and perhaps search the development sub-forum.
Practically, you need to precisely document how someone else can recreate the bug.
If the bug cannot be repeatably recreated, the problem might be your own.
-
@bradenmcg:
I need a suggestion of what to collect / log in order to prove that something is wrong, as I asked earlier.
Google how to submit a proper bug report and perhaps search the development sub-forum.
Practically, you need to precisely document how someone else can recreate the bug.
If the bug cannot be repeatably recreated, the problem might be your own.
That's really hard to do without knowing what I should be logging to prove the existence of the problem. It's not like I'm coming in here screaming that everything sucks, I'm asking for suggestions of what I should be recording, specifically so I can submit a detailed bug report (or determine if this is actually a bug or not).
In any case, after re-applying the shaper wizard like 6 more times, the problem seems to have gone away, and I'm not really sure why.
The only change in procedure is that I used rc.conf_mount_rw from SSH (I'm on the embedded platform) before running through with the wizard this time. Normally the wizard invokes a double-remount (RO->RW->RO) between each step of the sequence, which makes it incredibly slow (and this is an easily-reproducible bug!) Pre-mounting RW works around this…
-
If you are interested in persuing a bug report I would see how other successful pfSense bug reports were conducted.
https://redmine.pfsense.org
