Comments on: Polling and FreeBSD

By: Chris Buechler

Chris Buechler — Fri, 17 May 2013 04:04:45 +0000

At this time, polling is not recommended at all.

By: Erwin

Erwin — Thu, 16 May 2013 18:55:49 +0000

Is this also true in 2013 for an Alix wrapboard? I am running the latest Pfsense (2.0.3) and I am seeing a lot of CPU power being used for device polling, however trying to disable device polling resulted in a unresponsive firewall.

By: Chris Buechler

Chris Buechler — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:45:00 +0000

6 * 30 Mb is only 180 Mb, a Pentium III can handle that kind of load with good NIC's, and have power to spare. Routing only is measurably faster than without NAT.

If you're choking at 180 Mb, not using polling, and using good NIC's (Intel preferred, and definitely not something like Realtek) your hardware is undersized.

By: dalex

dalex — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 12:12:00 +0000

While speed for internet is still adequate, it’s becoming a problem with WIFI. Imagine all 6 (30 Mbit/s capable) links from my home’s roof asking ftp from the server down. The server is capable of supplying the load, but the pfsense router will choke! This is with plain routing, no NAT.

By: Chris Buechler

Chris Buechler — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 18:56:00 +0000

I assume you mean jumbo frames. No, I have not had a chance to test with jumbo frames yet, though I plan to do so in the future. That’s not applicable to the vast majority of our installs, so it’s not a high priority for me right now.

By: Anders

Anders — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 09:30:00 +0000

Have you also done some testes with jump frames / MTU ?
http://www.psc.edu/~mathis/MTU/