RAM for A1SRI-2558F



  • What are you using for memory on your A1SRI-2558F? Is 2x4gb enough for pfsense on a small network?



  • Probably yes. It depends on what packages you will use. But It should be fine with most configurations.



  • Currently using a 4GB module on my pfsense box for my home network. Running:
    Pfblocker
    Snort
    4x OpenVPN servers
    IPSec server
    4x OpenVPN clients

    It's using 12% of the available memory. So 8gb is more than enough..



  • @jgiannakas:

    Currently using a 4GB module on my pfsense box for my home network. Running:
    Pfblocker
    Snort
    4x OpenVPN servers
    IPSec server
    4x OpenVPN clients

    It's using 12% of the available memory. So 8gb is more than enough..

    Yes, I would say 8gb is more then enough for me. Thanks!  :)



  • What are you using for memory on your A1SRI-2558F? Is 2x4gb enough for pfsense on a small network?

    I use Kingston Value ECC RAM for this board without any problems!

    • pfSense pure firewall = ~2 GB
    • pfSense pure firewall & Squid = ~4 GB
    • pfSense pure firewall VPN & & Squid & Snort & pfBlocker NG & mbuf size high to 1000000 = ~8GB
    • pfSense pure firewall VPN & & Squid & Snort & pfBlocker NG & DNSBL mbuf size high to 1000000 = ~16 GB
    • many packets + all other things massive amount of users and connections + Squid Caching with RAM usage = ~32 GB


  • @BlueKobold:

    What are you using for memory on your A1SRI-2558F? Is 2x4gb enough for pfsense on a small network?

    I use Kingston Value ECC RAM for this board without any problems!

    • pfSense pure firewall = ~2 GB
    • pfSense pure firewall & Squid = ~4 GB
    • pfSense pure firewall VPN & & Squid & Snort & pfBlocker NG & mbuf size high to 1000000 = ~8GB
    • pfSense pure firewall VPN & & Squid & Snort & pfBlocker NG & DNSBL mbuf size high to 1000000 = ~16 GB
    • many packets + all other things massive amount of users and connections + Squid Caching with RAM usage = ~32 GB

    What traffic do you have to require 1,000,000 mbuf size? I currently have about 20 lan clients using 5570 of 131072 mbuf's with normal household traffic (torrents as required, Netflix, amazon video on demand, smart tv, smart thermostats etc). Also I did not notice any increase in memory used by DNSBL and Im using geo filters and ad blocker on the component. Why would that push the memory use by another 8gb in your recommendation above?



  • @jgiannakas

    What traffic do you have to require 1,000,000 mbuf size?

    In normal or under normal conditions you could try out to tune your pfSense firewall if some problems
    occurring, but the same things can be done before something occurs to prevent your firewall by going into trouble!

    So it might be pending on your own or personally person and willing what way you should walk on, this
    is nothing I can tell regular and even to someone, but based on the historical development and history
    of FreeBSD and pfSense the kernel space is not very high, and if there will be today a workaround for
    us users to solve around this older behaviour it could not be false to do so. So one of us is more willing
    to do it after problems are there and the other one is doing it at first, if this was not matching your
    own and personal nature you will not consider to this step for sure.

    I currently have about 20 lan clients using 5570 of 131072 mbuf's with normal household traffic (torrents as required, Netflix, amazon video on demand, smart tv, smart thermostats etc).

    It is not only based on the used hardware it is also pending on the use case that is right, but how many
    queue per CPU core and NIC ports are opened and is different and also how fast they will be saturated!
    this must be found out by each user itself, but to be on the save side, or better not be wanting to run
    into trouble or problems might be not a bad thing in my eyes. If your pfSense box is never going into
    trouble you might be lucky and don´t have to care about this things, other may have to narrow down
    the mbuf size to 65000 that there 10 GBit/s interface will be running smooth and liquid without any
    pain and another one have to tune and set up more then the mbuf size. Its nothing special to free
    some kernel space if this might be able to realize.

    Also I did not notice any increase in memory used by DNSBL and Im using geo filters and ad blocker on the component.

    Its not only the one or two packets you will be installing and/or using, it is from the whole configuration and the use case
    and the total amount of users and checked lists or the activation of TLD too and if you are running squid also and in which
    wise! Based on that behaviour, you will be able to find many different reports about that:
    DNSBL TLD feature
    DNSBL TLD feature

    Why would that push the memory use by another 8gb in your recommendation above?

    Use case, hardware, enabled or checked lists and many more things could be driving it into the one or other
    direction but as said above many things could be worked out be installing enough or much RAM and since years
    all peoples are talking about "RAM is cheap to get the hands on" and why now should I not go the easy and cheap
    way to solve around those things? Why is 8 GB too much if I want to high up the default Squid memory amount
    and tune the mbuf size. Many other may sort it not like me, but this might be then perhaps based on another
    configs, case of usage and other things.


Log in to reply