Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason?
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 2:14 PM, mehma sarja mehmasa...@gmail.com wrote: Does the default 1 states under system|advanced limit speed at some point? Not in and of itself, that's somewhat but not necessarily related to throughput. In some environments you can hit that with 1 Mbps, in others it'll take 150 Mbps. Most fall somewhere in between. If you exhaust your state table it'll stop accepting new connections, all the existing ones will perform at their maximum capable speed. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
[pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason?
I had a P 500 III CPU with 1G of RAM and now a P 400II with 756M RAM running embedded (512M CF) 1.2.3 and three Intel 1000GT's. One WAN, Two LAN.LAN 2 is LAN1 10.a.b+1.c.d. (/24), both performed much the same. The cable download speed has just been upgraded from 4MBps to 10Mbps however downloads on pfSense are still limited to 4Mbps, despite several modem power cycles. A notebook direct connected to the cable modem does indeed get 10Mbps suggesting pfsense is the bottleneck. The book and http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Hardware_requirements suggest to me I should be getting 20-40Mbps throughput. Can anyone suggest how I can investigate from here? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason?
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Tortise tort...@paradise.net.nz wrote: I had a P 500 III CPU with 1G of RAM and now a P 400II with 756M RAM running embedded (512M CF) 1.2.3 and three Intel 1000GT's. One WAN, Two LAN. LAN 2 is LAN1 10.a.b+1.c.d. (/24), both performed much the same. The cable download speed has just been upgraded from 4MBps to 10Mbps however downloads on pfSense are still limited to 4Mbps, despite several modem power cycles. A notebook direct connected to the cable modem does indeed get 10Mbps suggesting pfsense is the bottleneck. The book and http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Hardware_requirements suggest to me I should be getting 20-40Mbps throughput. Can anyone suggest how I can investigate from here? Traffic shaping enabled? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason?
- Original Message - From: Chris Buechler cbuech...@gmail.com To: support@pfsense.com Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:02 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason? On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Tortise tort...@paradise.net.nz wrote: I had a P 500 III CPU with 1G of RAM and now a P 400II with 756M RAM running embedded (512M CF) 1.2.3 and three Intel 1000GT's. One WAN, Two LAN. LAN 2 is LAN1 10.a.b+1.c.d. (/24), both performed much the same. The cable download speed has just been upgraded from 4MBps to 10Mbps however downloads on pfSense are still limited to 4Mbps, despite several modem power cycles. A notebook direct connected to the cable modem does indeed get 10Mbps suggesting pfsense is the bottleneck. The book and http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Hardware_requirements suggest to me I should be getting 20-40Mbps throughput. Can anyone suggest how I can investigate from here? =Traffic shaping enabled? Yes! OK now disabled, that's doubled it to 8Mbps. As its evening here it might be high traffic cutting it down from 10 to 8, I'll try again during a lower demand time. Thanks Chris. Out of interest wouldn't a larger CPU increase the shapers limits? (there was little difference in the 400 and 500, I would have expected some difference?) Last test from http://www.nzdsl.co.nz/ was 9.5Mbps, so I guess that's the answer. (Looks to read book's traffic shaper section) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason?
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Tortise tort...@paradise.net.nz wrote: I had a P 500 III CPU with 1G of RAM and now a P 400II with 756M RAM running embedded (512M CF) 1.2.3 and three Intel 1000GT's. One WAN, Two LAN. LAN 2 is LAN1 10.a.b+1.c.d. (/24), both performed much the same. The cable download speed has just been upgraded from 4MBps to 10Mbps however downloads on pfSense are still limited to 4Mbps, despite several modem power cycles. A notebook direct connected to the cable modem does indeed get 10Mbps suggesting pfsense is the bottleneck. The book and http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Hardware_requirements suggest to me I should be getting 20-40Mbps throughput. Can anyone suggest how I can investigate from here? =Traffic shaping enabled? Yes! OK now disabled, that's doubled it to 8Mbps. As its evening here it might be high traffic cutting it down from 10 to 8, I'll try again during a lower demand time. Thanks Chris. Out of interest wouldn't a larger CPU increase the shapers limits? (there was little difference in the 400 and 500, I would have expected some difference?) Last test from http://www.nzdsl.co.nz/ was 9.5Mbps, so I guess that's the answer. (Looks to read book's traffic shaper section) From my memory you tell the shaper the bandwidth of your connection it order for it to work. As a result the value set here is you upper limit regardless of CPU - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason?
- Original Message - From: Robert Mortimer rmorti...@bluechiptechnology.co.uk To: support@pfsense.com Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:20 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason? =Traffic shaping enabled? Yes! OK now disabled, that's doubled it to 8Mbps. As its evening here it might be high traffic cutting it down from 10 to 8, I'll try again during a lower demand time. Thanks Chris. Out of interest wouldn't a larger CPU increase the shapers limits? (there was little difference in the 400 and 500, I would have expected some difference?) Last test from http://www.nzdsl.co.nz/ was 9.5Mbps, so I guess that's the answer. (Looks to read book's traffic shaper section) From my memory you tell the shaper the bandwidth of your connection it order for it to work. As a result the value set here is you upper limit regardless of CPU qwanroot 0 No 2000 Kb qwanRoot qlanroot 0 No 4000 Kb qlanRoot Now that seems significant. It is such a long time ago since I ran that wizard I'd forgotten that bit! Thanks guys. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason?
Does the default 1 states under system|advanced limit speed at some point? Mehma === On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Tortise tort...@paradise.net.nz wrote: - Original Message - From: Robert Mortimer rmorti...@bluechiptechnology.co.uk To: support@pfsense.com Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:20 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Bottleneck for some reason? =Traffic shaping enabled? Yes! OK now disabled, that's doubled it to 8Mbps. As its evening here it might be high traffic cutting it down from 10 to 8, I'll try again during a lower demand time. Thanks Chris. Out of interest wouldn't a larger CPU increase the shapers limits? (there was little difference in the 400 and 500, I would have expected some difference?) Last test from http://www.nzdsl.co.nz/ was 9.5Mbps, so I guess that's the answer. (Looks to read book's traffic shaper section) From my memory you tell the shaper the bandwidth of your connection it order for it to work. As a result the value set here is you upper limit regardless of CPU qwanroot 0 No 2000 Kb qwanRoot qlanroot 0 No 4000 Kb qlanRoot Now that seems significant. It is such a long time ago since I ran that wizard I'd forgotten that bit! Thanks guys. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
