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.
    • 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.