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
      last edited by andresmorago

      Hello to all

      Im going through a learning curve with pfSense on my recently installed system.

      2.4.5-RELEASE-p1 (amd64)
      FreeBSD 11.3-STABLE

      Lenovo m93p Tiny
      480gb SSD (Kingston 480GB A400 SATA 3 SSD SA400S37/480G)
      8gb RAM

      According to the SMART parameter 233 Flash_Writes_GiB, which i have been constantly monitoring, the write rate is about 1.5 gb per hour.

      My log setup is
      63b7ce03-e33f-405d-b1c7-d6825c2db544-image.png

      I have installed:
      *Suricata
      *pfBlockerNG
      *Status_traffic_totals
      *ntopng (which, after disabling it, i was able to decrease the write rate down to 1 gb/hour)

      Some questions:
      *as im well aware the SSD will eventually wear off, do you think this is a decent write rate for my system?
      *in case not, is there any way to improve it?
      *i find it hard to believe than both pfBlocker and Suricata can write 1gb of data per hour. is this a normal behavior?
      *i have seen mixed opinions regarding RAM disks for var and tmp. what can you recommend for my case?

      thanks!

      provelsP 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • 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.