PC Engines apu2 experiences

Veldkornet

@kinch said in PC Engines apu2 experiences:

@DaddyGo

I've examined it and found the following:

iperf3 LAB
No matter if APU2/3/4 I get a throughput with single connection of 750-850Mbit/s (LAN 2 OPT)

With 2 or more connections I get about 945Mbit/s.

A Speedtest.net gives the value 934Mbit/s UP/DOWN

I have tested the following BIOS versions:
V4.9.0.2
V4.11.0.2
V4.12.0.1

All the same.

But what I noticed, tested on APU2 and APU3, that pfsense version 2.4.5 does not reach the same throughput as 2.4.4-p3.
With Single Connection pfsense 2.4.5 reaches "only" about 400-500Mbit/s. With pfsense 2.4.5 I can only reach 940Mbps with 8 connections.

I also noted something weird with 2.4.5.

My iPerf speeds were also much lower than normal. What I did to fix it was:

disabling hardware offload (check the check boxes)
save, no reboot (iPerf results the same)
re-enabling hardware offload (clear the check boxes)
save, no reboot (iPerf results back up to the expected levels)

The only thing I did between having good iPerf results and slow ones was reboot the device. It's as if after a reboot, it forgot that hardware offload was enabled, and I just needed to set it again.

DaddyGo

@Veldkornet

pity this to argue further.... (LRO / TSO / etc.)
the forum is full of why you need to disable "offloading"

if you use pfSense for routing, (*****not recommended!!! *****), but just think of IPS netmap
******https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/config/advanced-setup.html#Networking

and @jimp https://forum.netgate.com/topic/42669/tso-and-lro-on-alix-boards

netmap it will not start properly unless they are disabled

all forum threads that belong here, it starts with this - disabling this features first -

DaddyGo

@kinch

let's wait for this 2.4.5-p1
but indeed we also experienced some difference, but not significant

just a suggestion instead of speedtest_net, I prefer to use this nperf.com
it uses a much more serious algorithm to saturate, ergo the measurement more accurate

DaddyGo

@Veldkornet

"The only thing I did between having good iPerf results and slow ones was reboot the device. It's as if after a reboot, it forgot that hardware offload was enabled, and I just needed to set it again."

so,

enabling / disabling these functions will in any case require a restart!
without it it makes no sense, thus, the test is not relevant either

if the function is still active after a restart, this must be disabled with this way

/boot/loader.conf.local

hw.bce.tso_enable=0 or 1
hw.bce.lro_enable=0 or 1 ......... etc.

edit: bce / igb / etc.

test method after reboot:

ifconfig igbX | grep CSUM

X= 1 ,2, 3, 4, or........

stephenw10

@FLOK said in PC Engines apu2 experiences:

My computer's stuck on the switch of an IP phone.
It throttles traffic to 100Mbits.

Ha, I have done exactly that before.

FLOK

@stephenw10
the joke is, that the pc still shows gigabit, although the performance is not reached

stephenw10

Ooo ouch. Yeah I didn't have that excuse.

logan5247

Anyone running 2.4.5-p1 yet? Already on 2.4.5, so I don't think there would be much of a chance for something to go wrong...
https://www.netgate.com/blog/pfsense-2-4-5-release-p1-now-available.html

fireodo

@logan5247 said in PC Engines apu2 experiences:

Anyone running 2.4.5-p1 yet? Already on 2.4.5, so I don't think there would be much of a chance for something to go wrong...
https://www.netgate.com/blog/pfsense-2-4-5-release-p1-now-available.html

Here running on 2.4.5_p1 - since yesterday and I cannot see any issue ...

daemonix

Do you run ntopng on apu2c4 without problems on 200-300mbit lines (20mbit ish upload)? (I run pfBlocker, openVPN client and an openVPN server... mo snort etc)

Is this too heavy on the CPU?

Qinn

@daemonix I run Ntopng, no worries works good.

fireodo

@Qinn said in PC Engines apu2 experiences:

@daemonix I run Ntopng, no worries work good.

Hmm, strange here - i uninstalled ntopng because every time I saved the settings I got a core dump (but ntopng has continued to work).

Qinn

@fireodo In the past, Ntopng was slow, not to say very slow and I walked away from it, in the beginning of this year I tried it again and I was amazed how it progressed.

fireodo

@Qinn said in PC Engines apu2 experiences:

@fireodo In the past, Ntopng was slow, not to say very slow and I walked away from it, in the beginning of this year I tried it again and I was amazed how it progressed.

I am speaking from the newest version (0.8.13_5) and its the "core dump" what make me uninstall it - not the speed.

Qinn

@fireodo I am running ntopng v0.8.13_5 runs like a charm, maybe it's the ram, although your 2Gb should be enough as when I stop the service, memory usage goes down a 10% here...

fireodo

@Qinn said in PC Engines apu2 experiences:

@fireodo I am running ntopng v0.8.13_5 runs like a charm, maybe it's the ram, although your 2Gb should be enough as when I stop the service, memory usage goes down a 10% here...

Lucky you - it was running fine here too, (excluding the core dump on saving settings) - maybe there is something in my configuration that is conflicting with it when I'm saving the settings ...

Qinn

@fireodo Just a guess as default Ntopng keeps settings, maybe, uncheck this and then remove the package, then reinstall, maybe vanilla works fine

fireodo

@Qinn said in PC Engines apu2 experiences:

@fireodo Just a guess as default Ntopng keeps settings, maybe, uncheck this and then remove the package, then reinstall, maybe vanilla works fine

It was a vanilla install when that core dump issue occure - i gave it up ...
(And btw: its really overkill for my network)

daemonix

I got some core dumps here again... I think its quite heavy for 24/7 use.

Qinn

@daemonix It's running 24/7 since 6 months never had a problem with it.