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

    Playing with fq_codel in 2.4

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Traffic Shaping
    1.1k Posts 123 Posters 1.5m 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.
    • M
      mind12 @andresmorago
      last edited by

      @andresmorago Seems like you have switched the limit and flows parameter values.
      Limit should be 10240 and flows 20480

      R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • R
        Ricardox @mind12
        last edited by

        @mind12 For me so it works perfectlyImagem-5.png Imagem-4.png Imagem-3.png Imagem-2.png Imagem-1.jpg

        M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • M
          mind12 @Ricardox
          last edited by

          @ricardox You also have 10240 configured for the limiter not 20480.

          Can you achieve your max speed with such a low queue lengths?
          I lost about 15Mbit/s from my 150Mbit download even with a 10K queue length.

          Why is the gateway empty for the In queue fw rule? I thought it's a must.
          And what's that 100 Weight for in the child queue? Never saw that elsewhere.

          Thx

          Z R 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Z
            zwck @mind12
            last edited by

            @mind12 is there a general rule of thumb how to choose target interval quantum limit and flow ?

            M R 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • M
              mind12 @zwck
              last edited by

              @zwck
              Idk, I have just used the same working config as others here from this post: https://forum.netgate.com/topic/112527/playing-with-fq_codel-in-2-4/815

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • P
                Pentangle @andresmorago
                last edited by

                @andresmorago Check out your floating firewall rules in/out pipes - are they switched?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • R
                  Ricardox @mind12
                  last edited by

                  @mind12 For my 200/100 MB network I have no loss of speed. X86 PC

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • R
                    Ricardox @zwck
                    last edited by

                    @zwck I believe not, change the values and test, for my network these values work well.

                    Z 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Z
                      zwck @Ricardox
                      last edited by

                      @ricardox whats your advertised line speed?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • KOMK
                        KOM
                        last edited by

                        This post is deleted!
                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • T
                          TheNarc
                          last edited by

                          I don't mean to hijack the thread, but has anyone else seen any catastrophic issues with adjusting fq_codel parameters since upgrading to 2.5.0? I was playing with one of my systems that had limit and flows both set to 1024. The consensus - as much as there is one - seems to be that 10240 and 20480, respectively, may yield better results so long as you're not memory constrained. I have 4GB and it was rarely more than 20 to 30% utilized so I thought I'd try.

                          Now, for full disclosure, there was some negligence on my part and I was following @andresmorago's post which accidentally had these values flipped (so 20480 for limit and 10240 for flows). When I set those values and applied, the pfSense system became unresponsive (even to pings). I eventually had to resort to hard powering it off, but it didn't come back when I turned it back on either. So I connected a monitor and was able to observe that at some point in the boot process, it began rapidly spamming the period character (.), and did so at such a rate that it was impossible to view the last boot message before this happened. If I were better versed in FreeBSD I may have known what to do to glean more useful information, but I had unhappy users so I just resorted to doing a fresh 2.5.0 installation and restoration of a config backup.

                          Also of note, after that config backup, I threw caution to the wind and tried to update the parameters again, but this time to limit 10240 and flows 20480. That time, which I clicked apply, the system spontaneously rebooted. It did come back, and the new values had been applied, but I don't know what happened there.

                          So this isn't really a support request, more just wondering if anyone else has seen any weirdness along these lines. I'm wary of adjusting these parameters any more now as well lest I need to perform a full reinstallation again. I also can't directly implicate 2.5.0 specifically here, although I believe this was the first time I changed the fq_codel params since upgrading, and I know that prior to the upgrade I had done a lot of experimentation with changing them without any issues.

                          P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • P
                            Pentangle @TheNarc
                            last edited by

                            @thenarc Not seen anything like that, but I was aware that the traffic shaping in earlier pfSense instances could play havoc with the connection if it changed for some other reason. I have recently built a v2.5.0 fresh instance and configured it with FQ_CoDel with no issues.

                            T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • T
                              TheNarc @Pentangle
                              last edited by

                              @pentangle Thanks for the input. I'd feel better had I not seen the spontaneous reset after adjusting these parameters following a fresh install; although it was a fresh install plus a config restore, so perhaps I pulled in some invalid configuration along with it. Just didn't have the stamina at the time to re-configure everything from scratch ;)

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • M
                                mind12
                                last edited by

                                I have applied the same settings for my 150/10 Mb connection but my download speed wont move above 130Mb. Upload is fine. Checked CPU usage also during the speedtest but it's fine abou 30% utilization at all.

                                These are my config, similar to @Ricardox 's:
                                Pfsense VM with Intel NICs 2CPU 4GB RAM (about 60% utilized)
                                All network hardware offload off because of suricata inline mode.

                                DownLimiter:
                                147Mb, Tail Drop - FQ_CODEL (5,100,300,10240,20480), Queue 10000, ECN off
                                DownQueue:
                                Taildrop, ECN off

                                Any idea/tweak I could try?

                                R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • R
                                  Ricardox @mind12
                                  last edited by Ricardox

                                  @mind12 Installed Open-VM-Tools? For my 200/100 MB network I have no loss of speed. X86 PC!
                                  realtek gigabit network cardVelocidade.jpg

                                  M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • M
                                    mind12 @Ricardox
                                    last edited by

                                    @ricardox
                                    Sure, without the limiters I get maximum speed too.

                                    F R 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • F
                                      fabrizior @mind12
                                      last edited by fabrizior

                                      @mind12 @Ricardox

                                      I think I still have a bit off tuning to do... Any recommendations?

                                      Have Comcast 400/25 service.
                                      Getting ~380/23 with my limiter config and bufferbloat lags of 56ms/41ms respectively, but with max download bufferbloat lag spiking up to ~230ms.

                                      DSLReports SpeedTest (limiters on)
                                      DSLReports SpeedTest with limiters

                                      WANDown limiter @ 400mbit/s
                                      Queue: CoDel, target:5 interval:100
                                      Scheduler Config: FQ_CODEL, target:5, interval:100, quantum: 1514, limit: 5120, flows 1024, QueueLength: 1001, ECN: [checked]

                                      WANUp limiter @ 25Mbit/s
                                      Queue: CoDel, target:5 interval:100
                                      Scheduler: FQ_CODEL, target:5, interval:100, quantum: 1514, limit: 10240, flows 1024, QueueLength: 1001, ECN: [checked]

                                      EDIT: added detail with limiters disabled.
                                      Perhaps I should just turn them off??? Am I really getting any benefit?

                                      448/24 MBit/s and 51/67 ms bufferbloat with limiters disabled

                                      [DSLReports SpeedTest (no limiters)]
                                      DSLReports SpeedTest Results without limiters)

                                      SW:
                                      pfSense v. 2.4.5-RELEASE-p1
                                      pfBlockerNG-devel (2.2.5_37), ntopng, bandwidthd, telegraf
                                      Openvpn server active, no connections at time of test.

                                      HW:
                                      Protectli Vault FW6C
                                      Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7200U CPU @ 2.50GHz
                                      Current: 2400 MHz, Max: 2601 MHz
                                      AES-NI CPU Crypto: Yes (active)
                                      CPU Utilization: ~5%
                                      Memory Usage: ~17% of 8GB
                                      Network HW Offloading: [edit] disabled enabled

                                      M T 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • M
                                        mind12 @fabrizior
                                        last edited by

                                        @fabrizior Hm if the latency wont go below 50ms with and without the limiters I don't see any reason to use them. In my setup despite the speed decrease with the limiters the latency is around 10ms.

                                        Sadly I dont know and have not found any info about those advanced scheduling parameters and how to tune them. Have you tried the values/config we posted?

                                        B P 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • B
                                          bobbenheim @mind12
                                          last edited by

                                          @mind12 you can read up on the various parameters here

                                          Besides that i don't believe that the field QueueLength does anything when using FQ_CoDel.

                                          F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • R
                                            Ricardox @mind12
                                            last edited by

                                            @mind12 See the images of my configuration above, I am using fq_codel limiters.

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