This is valuable input. Thank you to you and Peter.
We had to add the tunables rows where they did not exist before. Perhaps
if this had been a brand new virgin installation, the installer would
have made suitable tunables estimates, based on the hardware, and
inserted them into a new config. By contrast, as a system-in-place, the
installer perhaps skipped the step, seeing the preexisting tunables
table? We've been dragging this configuration forward from version
2.0. We've been bitten by this kind of thing before, where a new sane
default is ignored by virtue of a previous config. Just recently
I recently did a virgin install of 2.3.2 nano on an older atom (a
Soekris 6501), and found there were no tunables for kern.ipc.nmbclusters
nor kern.ipc.nmbufs. Maybe it's a nano/full-install difference? I
would think most people running the a Rangeley board are running the
full version. We will also begin running the full version with 2.4,
(ZFS copies = 2) :-)
On 1/25/2017 1:15 PM, Vick Khera wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Karl Fife <[email protected]> wrote:
pfsense 2.2.6 was running without issue on our Supermicro A1SRi-2758F
rangeley board (Intel Atom C2758)
Are you sure you didn't hard-code them before in the system tunables
section under 2.2? On my C2758 system (exact same motherboard) running
pfSense 2.3.2-RELEASE-p1, these are the values:
kern.ipc.nmbclusters: 1000000
kern.ipc.nmbufs: 1019445
and I've not tuned them at all.
What did you have to set them to? I have no additional NICs aside from the
4 built-in.
_______________________________________________
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
_______________________________________________
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
