[Talk] - pfSense 2.3 release/upgrades

[sfx2000]

So far, the upgrade process itself has been fairly straight-forward...

Opening a thread for issues/concerns after the update...

 

[Nullity]

No concerns aside from the apparent replacement of "RRD Graphs" with "Monitoring". It's pretty, but is it as useful?

Also, my 1080p Nexus 9 cannot fully fit the new pfSense GUI into a browser page...

 

[kvic]

Finally the dev team could start coding 3.0 after a break for beers..

 

[coxhaus]

I don't seem to have any major problems with pfsense 2.3. My cpu is now running 1998 MHz instead of 749 MHz.

 

[Nullity]

I don't seem to have any major problems with pfsense 2.3. My cpu is now running 1998 MHz instead of 749 MHz.

My pfSense only reports the max speed now. Dunno if the GUI is simply different or if the CPU is actually running at max.

I tried to find a FreeBSD CLI command to print the current CPU frequency, but I had no luck...

 

[kvic]

I tried to find a FreeBSD CLI command to print the current CPU frequency, but I had no luck...

Under Darwin, I can get by...does it work?

$ sysctl -a | grep -i hw.cpu

 

[Nullity]

Under Darwin, I can get by...does it work?

$ sysctl -a | grep -i hw.cpu

No. I grepped "cpu", "current", and "freq" and got no relevant data.

 

[kvic]

No. I grepped "cpu", "current", and "freq" and got no relevant data.

I guess quite different then..

 

[sfx2000]

I've been catching up on the chatter over on the official site - seems that either the upgrades go well, or they go very badly...

I might wait for 2.3.1 before making the jump on production - took a while to get 2.2.6 fully sorted and running well.

The RRD graphs - many folks have commented on the missing stuff there - so my best guess is that maybe they'll drop it back in at some point - the monitoring functionality is neat, and one can slice/dice things on the fly, so perhaps keep both.

CPU utilization - many folks have observed higher utilization while in the WebGUI compared to pre-2.3 releases - but if one goes into top and look at loads there, it's about the same..

 

[sfx2000]

No concerns aside from the apparent replacement of "RRD Graphs" with "Monitoring". It's pretty, but is it as useful?

Also, my 1080p Nexus 9 cannot fully fit the new pfSense GUI into a browser page...

Was thinking about this - and I might do a quick writeup on how to export the SNMP data out to a Cacti server (and then perhaps get Xymon and Syslog charting as well) - and that should take care of most of the charting/reporting data..

Been considering this for a while for my QNAP NAS box, so seems like a good time to start on it...

 

[coxhaus]

I like your idea of the Cacti server. What are you going to run it on?

What does the output look like? Is it something you need to study all the time or will it track at a higher level? I am retired and kind of want things automatic.

Let know as you do it and what the results are.

 

[sfx2000]

I like your idea of the Cacti server. What are you going to run it on?

What does the output look like? Is it something you need to study all the time or will it track at a higher level? I am retired and kind of want things automatic.

Let know as you do it and what the results are.

I've got a VM running on my QNAP (KVM-QEMU) that does utility duty at the moment for hosting mysql and a small dokuwiki for my notes (so LAMP is installed on it). Since the NAS is running 24/7 anyways, and the VM is also running 24/7, makes sense to take things there...

Cacti uses RRDTool to generate plots - similar to Xymon...

Cacti parses SNMP, Xymon parses Syslog...

Used to do the same thing with my data center gear when that was all running...

 

[sfx2000]

What does the output look like?

 

[sfx2000]

And here's info on Xymon - thing here is that you might have to install an agent on the monitored machines - and configuration there is challenging - but the upside is excellent reporting and email/pages if things go above/below thresholds...

http://xymon.sourceforge.net

 

[oletuv]

I've been catching up on the chatter over on the official site - seems that either the upgrades go well, or they go very badly...

I might wait for 2.3.1 before making the jump on production - took a while to get 2.2.6 fully sorted and running well.

I´ve also been following the pfSense forum after the 2.3 release. Seems to be a lot of early issues. I´m not using pfSense yet (hopefully soon), but if I were I would also stick to 2.2.6 until the noise has calmed down.

Ole

 

[sfx2000]

No. I grepped "cpu", "current", and "freq" and got no relevant data.

try

sysctl -a | grep cpu.0.freq

Should get something like

dev.cpu.0.freq: 1225

dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2100/8 1837/7 1800/0 1600/0 1400/0 1225/0 1050/0 875/0 700/0 525/0 350/0 175/0

 

[coxhaus]

try

sysctl -a | grep cpu.0.freq

Should get something like

dev.cpu.0.freq: 1225

dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2100/8 1837/7 1800/0 1600/0 1400/0 1225/0 1050/0 875/0 700/0 525/0 350/0 175/0

Your command works for me. Looks like they removed the lower frequencies for my Xeon 5148 CPU.

dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2331/88000 1998/71619
dev.cpu.0.freq: 1998

 

[Nullity]

try

sysctl -a | grep cpu.0.freq

Should get something like

dev.cpu.0.freq: 1225

dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2100/8 1837/7 1800/0 1600/0 1400/0 1225/0 1050/0 875/0 700/0 525/0 350/0 175/0

Yeah, I get nothing with my Pentium D 2.8Ghz machine.

 

[sfx2000]

Yeah, I get nothing with my Pentium D 2.8Ghz machine

Check your voice mail - 2007 called - they want their computer back

At least it keeps the computer room warm

Pentium_D - old school Prescott processor?

Wonder if this is a 64-bit thing with the upstream BSD release - with the Pentium D's - some are 32-bit, some have early support for AMD64, but in those older machines, even if the CPU is 64 bit capable, the BIOS might not be...

 

[coxhaus]

Anybody know what the second number is behind the clock frequency?

dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2331/88000 1998/71619

I am looking at the 88000 and 71619 numbers.