102% disk space?



  • I've searched but found nothing on the board regarding disk space issues.
    Looking at the system logs I found this:

    Sep 23 14:25:34 	kernel: pid 6804 (php), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space
    

    I'm pretty sure that this is related to new image sizes.
    Can someone explain me in detail what I have to do in order to fix it?
    Or maybe Devs could release a full image already with the new size?
    Cheers guys





  • Hey Scott! What's up? :)
    Say, that's a full blown image right?
    That means that I just gotta backup my config and reflash my CF card right?
    Cheers



  • Yep



  • Geez, thanks ;)



  • Hi there,
    Unfortunately I didn't manage to find some time so that I could upgrade my system to a full-embedded RC2 from scratch like Scott advised.
    But now that RC3 is out I found a couple of spare minutes to reflash that CF card.
    For safety sake I didn't use my old config file.
    I made a new one especially for this new Release Candidate 8).
    Anyway, while I was reconfiguring my box the webgui passed out on me a couple of times and I had to push the reload button.
    Later I went to "status > system logs" and I found this:

    Oct 8 00:59:46 	kernel: pid 22332 (php), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space
    ...
    Oct 8 01:09:55 	kernel: pid 23176 (php), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space
    ...
    Oct 8 01:43:59 	kernel: pid 25235 (php), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space
    Oct 8 01:47:41 	kernel: sis1: Applying short cable fix (reg=e8)
    Oct 8 01:47:59 	kernel: sis1: Applying short cable fix (reg=e8)
    Oct 8 01:49:14 	kernel: sis1: Applying short cable fix (reg=e8)
    Oct 8 01:52:21 	kernel: sis1: Applying short cable fix (reg=e8)
    

    Look at those out of space items.
    And also look at those short cable fixes.
    I never knew why m0n0wall doesn't complaint about short cables on my system while pfSense always warns me about it.
    Even because my cable ethernet cables are now both 5 meter long…
    I would be much more relaxed if I didn't see those warnings once every 5 minutes but I gotta level it with you guys: my box flies with pfSense.
    It is as fast with m0n0 as it is with pfS (on the network side of things).
    But now comes the most curious thing about this: under "status > system" the Swap Disk progress bar shows some steady 49% ???
    Now what should I make of that?
    Can I do anything else in order to debug this out of swap issue?
    Cheers guys :)

    PS: could this have anything to do with my box having only 64MB RAM?
    I would be very much surprised if that would be the case.



  • It has to do with 64mb ram. This is not supported anymore. You need to have at least 128 mb.



  • Damn!
    Are you sure hoba?
    That means I'll either have to buy me a new box ASAP or keep using m0n0wall at home.
    Can you double check that information?
    TIA
    Cheers



  • @rds_correia:

    Are you sure hoba?

    This has been announced on all pfSEnse info sources a couple of months ago.
    Far to many problems just dissapeared when going to 128 Mb of RAM memory.
    Just upgrade ?



  • @rds_correia:

    Damn!
    Are you sure hoba?
    That means I'll either have to buy me a new box ASAP or keep using m0n0wall at home.
    Can you double check that information?
    TIA
    Cheers

    Yes, absolutely, we already infromed about that some time ago ( http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,1712.0.html ). Sorry dude.



  • Gertjan,
    I know damn well that it has been announced all over the place that 64MB toys won't be supported any longer.
    That's not the point and I'm not angry about that or anything.
    It's just that I wanna be pretty sure about this before going out and spending more than $300.00 on a net4801-60 w/case just because I'm on the rush.
    If my net4521 could handle it for a couple of more months I'd have time to search for an alternative.
    Heck, $300.00 might be enough to buy something better than a net4801-60 and I just don't know it yet because I didn't have enough time to investigate it properly ;).
    And I don't know why but I have a hunch that this should be more than just having only 64MB on my sokris box.
    After all I'm just using it to close everything and open a couple of ports for P2P as well as for Hamachi plus the remote webGUI through HTTPS.
    And I've got Dynamic DNS, SNMP and WoL started.
    Other than that everything is shutdown.
    It just doesn't make much sense to me and that's why I'm asking a developer to double check me on this one ;).
    TIA
    Cheers

    EDIT:
    Sorry Hoba, I didn't notice your reply.
    Yeah, I had already read that post that you posted the link for but in that same post is written that using 64MB devices as a simple firewall should still work.
    I'm not doing any traffic shapping or VPN or anything fancy.
    If you are 100% positive that it is down to the 64MB problem then I'll shut up but it's taking me some hard time to get used to that idea.
    I'll shutdown DynDNS, WoL and SNMP and I'll let you guys know if it still hangs up once in a while.
    Cheers



  • 128 megs of ram has been the minimum hardware requirements since the projects inception.  Really.  Visit the wayback machine if you don't believe me.  I remember sitting in a pub with CMB about 2 years ago when we decided to fork m0n0wall and we came up with that number at that time.

    All we did was change the COMPACT FLASH minimum size to 128 recently.

    102% disk space has nothing to do with system ram, it has everything to do with COMPACT FLASH SIZE.



  • Scott, let's forget about 102% disk space.
    I have already mentioned that this figure is now at a steady 49% usage.
    So no more 102% disk space progress bar under status > system.
    Now, hoba says that my kernel: pid 25235 (php), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space messages are due to not enough RAM, which could actually well be the case because I'm on 64MB RAM.
    But I guess it's better for me to get back to the start.
    I know you guys don't support <= 64MB RAM and that any issues with such environments won't be investigated by you guys, what I honestly think it's pretty fair after all.
    But I always thought that a 64MB RAM box could cope with the job when used as a simple firewall which is basically what can be read in the post hoba pointed out here http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,1712.0.html.
    So, one thing is should a 133Mhz/64MB RAM/256MB CF box be able to act as a simple firewall using pfS 1.0RC3?.
    And another thing would be boxes with <= 64MB RAM will not work properly and they might even state out-of-swap space during the course of it..
    So you see I am not really whining or anything.
    Well of course I am a little bit  ;D but just because I'd like to get sure that this out of disk space should be expected when a box is using less or equal than 64MB RAM.
    If we can't understand what I am talking about here then you better close the topic and move on because I'll figure out some way of dealing with this either by buying new hardware or by going back to m0n0 on my box and keeping the office box(es) running pfS :).
    TIA
    Cheers



  • You still do not understand.

    < 128 megs of ram has NEVER been supported.  EVER. EVER. EVER. EVER. PERIOD.

    If you have a machine with 64 megs of ram, run m0n0wall.



  • @sullrich:

    EVER. EVER. EVER. EVER. PERIOD.

    Now what's with the caps lock of your keyboard?
    Did I flame or anything?
    Come on, I'm just trying to make a point here.
    If you read hoba's sentence carefully then you will most surely end up believing that pfS can actually run on a 64MB box.
    So let's cut the crap.
    What do you make of this sentence?
    "If you want to use pfSense with these system only use it as basic router or accesspoint, …"
    If you go read it in the right thread you will end up believing that pfS could actually run fine if being used as a simple router, right?
    I won't open my mouth again about this even because I back you up all along with the "at least 128MB" but hoba's post should still be edited.
    Now I'll shut up forever because there's no point in going any further.
    I value your work and your effort but most of the time I get the feeling that you didn't like my remarks since the 1st day that I got here to the forum.
    Cheers



  • Quite frankly I don't like this entire "situation" that you are creating.  The RAM size has always been stated at needing 128 and somehow you seem to find a need to cry that your 64 meg device doesn't work well with pfSense.

    Of course it doesn't!  It doesn't meet our minimum requirements.



  • Just to clear things up a bit:

    Technical background: There are no swap partitions on embedded installs. CF-Media have limited write cycles. Writing frequently to it as your RAM is too low will kill it soon. Also if your system starts swapping to disk it will have a huge impact on overall performance. Not a good idea. We created some scripts to detect a 64mb ram condition and make it at least runable with a basic config though we do not support it. That was what I mentioned with "basic config" in the post around july.

    However as we move forward and try to improve speed and usablility at the systems that we created pfsense for (>=128 mb) the "64mb with basic config" might not be true anymore. Seriously, pfSense was created for bigger machines intentionally. Supporting embedds like wraps and soekris with 128 mb is more or less a side effect.

    Btw, in case I say go right and scott says go left, scott's suggestion always beats mine  ;)



  • @rds_correia:

    And also look at those short cable fixes.
    I never knew why m0n0wall doesn't complaint about short cables on my system while pfSense always warns me about it.
    Even because my cable ethernet cables are now both 5 meter long…
    I would be much more relaxed if I didn't see those warnings once every 5 minutes but I gotta level it with you

    That's probably because m0n0 isn't running RELENG_6_1.

    –Bill


Log in to reply