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

    is this ok for a SSD setup?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    18 Posts 5 Posters 1.8k Views 6 Watching
    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.
    • stephenw10S Offline
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      Hmm, that does seem high.

      RAM disks with Suricata and pfBlocker would need to be huge.

      How is that drive mounted? What does mount -p show?

      You could be hitting this if it's an older install: https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/9483

      Or it could be the counter is not showing values in the expected units.

      Steve

      A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • A Offline
        andresmorago @stephenw10
        last edited by andresmorago

        @stephenw10
        thanks Steve. this sounds concerning

        regarding the issue you mentioned, this is a very recent install (about 1 week).

        here are my mount points

        # mount -p
        zroot/ROOT/default      /                       zfs     rw,noatime,nfsv4acls    0 0
        devfs                   /dev                    devfs   rw              0 0
        zroot/var               /var                    zfs     rw,noatime,nfsv4acls    0 0
        zroot                   /zroot                  zfs     rw,noatime,nfsv4acls    0 0
        zroot/tmp               /tmp                    zfs     rw,nosuid,noatime,nfsv4acls     0 0
        /dev/md0                /var/run                ufs     rw              2 2
        devfs                   /var/dhcpd/dev          devfs   rw              0 0
        #
        

        and my /etc/fstab file which interestingly doesnt show any other partition (i dont know why)

        # Device                Mountpoint      FStype  Options         Dump    Pass#
        /dev/ada0p2             none    swap    sw              0       0
        

        regarding the counter, is there any way to confirm this?

        thanks again

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • AndyRHA Offline
          AndyRH
          last edited by

          I would not worry about the wear too much. According to the data sheet that drive is good for 160TB of writes. Or about 4,000 days at 1.5GB/hour.

          https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/710+8SNYSCL.pdf

          o||||o
          7100-1u

          JKnottJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
          • stephenw10S Offline
            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
            last edited by

            You are using ZFS so the fstab is no longer required to mount those.

            You can probably see something useful with the correct incantation of iostat.

            Steve

            A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • A Offline
              andresmorago @stephenw10
              last edited by andresmorago

              @stephenw10
              thanks

              im running this command. please correct me if im wrong.

              top -m io
              

              im seeing some casual activity spiking (100%) under php, suricata, vnstat and cron but nothing constant

              this is the iostat output

              # iostat
                     tty             md0             ada0            pass0             cpu
               tin  tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
                 0     2  0.00   0  0.00  23.75  20  0.47   0.40   0  0.00   2  0  0  0 97
              #
              

              @andyrh said in is this ok for a SSD setup?:

              I would not worry about the wear too much. According to the data sheet that drive is good for 160TB of writes. Or about 4,000 days at 1.5GB/hour.

              https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/710+8SNYSCL.pdf

              thanks for the information

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

                What are you seeing from top?

                Maybe try: top -mio -ototal -SH

                That will show you system processes too.

                Not really something I've ever dug into too deeply but iostat looks like it gives more useful data.
                You are certainly seeing higher values that I do:

                [2.4.5-RELEASE][admin@2220.stevew.lan]/root: iostat
                       tty             md0             ada0            pass0             cpu
                 tin  tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
                 170     1  0.00   0  0.00  31.28   1  0.03   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  0 99
                

                Steve

                A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • JKnottJ Offline
                  JKnott @AndyRH
                  last edited by

                  @andyrh said in is this ok for a SSD setup?:

                  Or about 4,000 days at 1.5GB/hour.

                  That's not even 11 years! 😉

                  PfSense running on Qotom mini PC
                  i5 CPU, 4 GB memory, 32 GB SSD & 4 Intel Gb Ethernet ports.
                  UniFi AC-Lite access point

                  I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...

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

                    Mmm, I guess 0.47MB/s is ~1.7GB/h.

                    0.03MB/s seems about average on the systems I have here without ramdisks. It's 0 with ramdisks.

                    But still well within the expect drive life I would think.

                    Steve

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • A Offline
                      andresmorago @stephenw10
                      last edited by andresmorago

                      hello @stephenw10
                      thanks all for your feedback. even though, at this rate, the ssd would probably last for a while, im concerned on the higher rate on my system compared to you. its way higher.

                      is there anything else i might check on my system?

                      here are the outputs:

                      # iostat
                             tty             md0             ada0            pass0             cpu
                       tin  tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
                         0     2  0.00   0  0.00  23.50  20  0.46   0.40   0  0.00   2  0  0  0 97
                      #
                      
                      # top -mio -ototal -SH
                      last pid: 53706;  load averages:  0.08,  0.12,  0.12                                                                                                                                       up 2+05:46:06  19:54:39
                      482 processes: 5 running, 454 sleeping, 23 waiting
                      CPU:  3.9% user,  0.1% nice,  0.7% system,  0.0% interrupt, 95.3% idle
                      Mem: 185M Active, 1599M Inact, 1182M Wired, 208K Buf, 4839M Free
                      ARC: 403M Total, 197M MFU, 165M MRU, 89K Anon, 1916K Header, 40M Other
                           134M Compressed, 438M Uncompressed, 3.26:1 Ratio
                      Swap: 2048M Total, 2048M Free
                      
                        PID USERNAME     VCSW  IVCSW   READ  WRITE  FAULT  TOTAL PERCENT COMMAND
                         19 root           20      0      1     41      0     42 100.00% zfskern{txg_thread_enter}
                      97223 root           13      0      2     10      0     12  75.00% php
                      87433 root            4      2      1      0      0      1   6.25% filterdns{imgur.com}
                      87433 root            2      0      1      0      0      1   6.25% filterdns{s.imgur.com}
                      83603 root            2      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sshd
                      96315 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% php
                      96014 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% php
                      95949 root            2      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% lighttpd_pfb
                      95823 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% php_pfb{php_pfb}
                      95764 root           38      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% clog_pfb
                      88796 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% vnstatd
                      31964 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sh
                      21628 unbound        12      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% unbound{unbound}
                      21628 unbound         8      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% unbound{unbound}
                      21628 unbound         8      2      0      0      0      0   0.00% unbound{unbound}
                      21628 unbound         8      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% unbound{unbound}
                      96844 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% dpinger{dpinger}
                      96844 root            8      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% dpinger{dpinger}
                      96844 root            8      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% dpinger{dpinger}
                      96844 root            2      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% dpinger{dpinger}
                      96844 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% dpinger{dpinger}
                      52515 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% openvpn
                       7368 root          188      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{suricata}
                       7368 root            7      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{RX#01-em0}
                       7368 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{W#01}
                       7368 root            2      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{W#02}
                       7368 root            2      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{W#03}
                       7368 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{W#04}
                       7368 root            2      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{FM#01}
                       7368 root            2      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% suricata{FR#01}
                      91862 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sh
                      91704 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sh
                      91670 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sshg-blocker{sshg-blocker}
                      91670 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sshg-blocker{sshg-blocker}
                      91373 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sshg-parser
                      91117 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% cat
                      90879 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sh
                      17118 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% nginx
                      16865 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% nginx
                      16643 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% nginx
                      13588 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% syslogd
                      13131 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% php-fpm{php-fpm}
                      93437 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sh
                      92850 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% sh
                      92179 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% getty
                      92024 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% getty
                      91891 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% getty
                      91769 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% getty
                      91535 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% getty
                      91492 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% getty
                      91180 root            0      0      0      0      0      0   0.00% getty
                      
                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • stephenw10S Offline
                        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                        last edited by

                        I've got to think it's because of zfs. It's not something I've ever looked too hard at because the only place it's really an issue is booting from flash and we don't use zfs there.

                        Steve

                        A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • A Offline
                          andresmorago @stephenw10
                          last edited by andresmorago

                          @stephenw10 should i consider UFS for my setup instead?
                          i dont have any big power outages concerns since all my systems run on UPS with power generator backup

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

                            If you can easily test that I would do so.

                            I don't really think you need to worry either way.

                            Steve

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • provelsP Offline
                              provels @andresmorago
                              last edited by provels

                              @andresmorago said in is this ok for a SSD setup?:

                              Lenovo m93p Tiny

                              On a tangent, looks like a nice little box for home-baked.
                              Does it have a slot for a NIC (NOPE) or are you going to use the wireless, or VLANs on the single NIC?

                              Peder

                              MAIN - pfSense+ 24.11-RELEASE - Adlink MXE-5401, i7, 16 GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. 500 GB HDD for SyslogNG
                              BACKUP - pfSense+ 23.01-RELEASE - Hyper-V Virtual Machine, Gen 1, 2 v-CPUs, 3 GB RAM, 8GB VHDX (Dynamic)

                              A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • A Offline
                                andresmorago @provels
                                last edited by andresmorago

                                @provels said in is this ok for a SSD setup?:

                                @andresmorago said in is this ok for a SSD setup?:

                                Lenovo m93p Tiny

                                On a tangent, looks like a nice little box for home-baked.
                                Does it have a slot for a NIC (NOPE) or are you going to use the wireless, or VLANs on the single NIC?

                                i added an additional mini PCIe ethernet card along with the other NIC that already came with the machine.

                                @stephenw10 said in is this ok for a SSD setup?:

                                If you can easily test that I would do so.
                                I don't really think you need to worry either way.
                                Steve

                                thanks Steve. i think i can do that tonight and test.
                                after disabling a lot of log options from suricata and pfblockerng, i was able to reduce the write rate:

                                [2.4.5-RELEASE][admin@svr00.moragomez.com]/root: iostat
                                       tty             md0             ada0            pass0             cpu
                                 tin  tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
                                   0     0  0.00   0  0.00  17.86  18  0.32   0.40   0  0.00   2  0  0  0 98
                                
                                A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • A Offline
                                  andresmorago @andresmorago
                                  last edited by

                                  hi again. @stephenw10
                                  i finally reinstalled everything with UFS. so far, the only think i disabled was suricata

                                  these are my numbers so far. ill keep testing and report back

                                  [2.4.5-RELEASE][admin@svr00.jjj.com]/root: iostat
                                         tty             md0              md1             ada0             cpu
                                   tin  tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
                                     0     6  0.00   1  0.00   0.00   5  0.00  29.00   4  0.11   1  0  0  0 99
                                  [2.4.5-RELEASE][admin@svr00.jjj.com]/root:
                                  
                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • stephenw10S Offline
                                    stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                    last edited by

                                    Yeah, I spoke to our devs about this since I'd never considered it. ZFS is expected to have a higher IO rate than UFS. What you are seeing in either case doesn't seem to be cause for alarm.

                                    Steve

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                    • A Offline
                                      andresmorago
                                      last edited by

                                      @stephenw10
                                      thanks so much for your feedback and information. i would stick with ufs from now on, due to my basic setup not needing much

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