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

    pfSense Plus and SG-3100

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Messages from the pfSense Team
    20 Posts 11 Posters 3.9k 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.
    • stephenw10S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      No, it's a real fix. See: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D28821

      B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • B
        beachbum2021 @stephenw10
        last edited by

        @stephenw10 said in pfSense Plus and SG-3100:

        https://reviews.freebsd.org/D28821

        i guess i'm just a little confused then. Is the fix going to degrade performance if we're limiting the hardware cpu cores? Do we need to reapproach our load on a 3100 with these changes?

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

          No, the temporary workaround was to disable one CPU core. That is not required with the fix that is now in 21.02p1.

          Steve

          F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • F
            flsnowbird @stephenw10
            last edited by

            @stephenw10 Do we remove that line from the config before or after applying the patch? Want the update to go as flawless as possible.

            B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • B
              bcruze @flsnowbird
              last edited by

              @flsnowbird said in pfSense Plus and SG-3100:

              @stephenw10 Do we remove that line from the config before or after applying the patch? Want the update to go as flawless as possible.

              I did it before
              Then did the update, then rebooted the firewall so the limitation were not in place

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

                Yes, you could do either but you will need to reboot after removing it since that is applied as a loader variable at boot.

                Steve

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • F
                  fg @stephenw10
                  last edited by

                  @stephenw10 It would be nice if you could explain in any detail what the problem is/was. I just purchased an SG3100 and I got no emailed warning about any potential issue either (would be nice really).

                  That said I answered the upgrade survey not knowing all that was meant by the upgrade to pfsense+. If you're going to make a really good firewall product in terms of control panel / GUI and work process you should get your hands on Microsoft's ISA firewall from some time ago. I don't know why the product disappeared but it was the best gateway/firewall/router I've ever used. I looked for a reasonable replacement and found pfsense to be the next best thing but you guys still don't measure up to something from 15 or so years ago. ;0)

                  Now that you're on a serious commercial product path that is what I'd look from you guys.

                  S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    SteveITS Galactic Empire @fg
                    last edited by

                    @fg said in pfSense Plus and SG-3100:

                    explain in any detail what the problem is/was

                    https://www.netgate.com/blog/pfsense-obscure-bugs-and-code-wizards.html

                    Pre-2.7.2/23.09: Only install packages for your version, or risk breaking it. Select your branch in System/Update/Update Settings.
                    When upgrading, allow 10-15 minutes to restart, or more depending on packages and device speed.
                    Upvote 👍 helpful posts!

                    R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • R
                      rloeb @SteveITS
                      last edited by

                      @teamits Wonderful blog explanation. Been a long time since I debugged code, and I enjoyed the description of the "hunt." Kudos to the Netgate team for a superb job.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • F
                        flsnowbird
                        last edited by

                        This same bug was in 2.5 DEVEL and I reported it to support, but was only told to revert to 2.4 stable. I guess I was just too exited about wireguard. Next big upgrade I'm waiting a few weeks before jumping on it.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.