On 2/22/06, Harri Hyyppa <oh6hik at sral dot fi> wrote:
> We had some testing with monowall 1.21 (generic-pc) and pfsense (whatever
> Throughput with same equipment was somewhat interesting.
> With m0n0wall we got 10-12 Mbit/s, with pfsense we got 90-100 Mbit/s. Is
> there something that we did wrong with m0n0wall or is pfsense that much
> better? (Lan performance, bridged performance was almost same on either one)
If you said the reverse was true, I could almost believe that (though
that would leave pfsense much slower than it should be). You have
some serious problem if pfsense performs one iota better than
m0n0wall, much less 10 times faster. FreeBSD 4.x is at least twice as
fast (networking-wise, on a single proc machine) as 6.x, hence
m0n0wall should be at least twice as fast as pfsense. There may be
some limited circumstances where improved driver support reduces that
difference, but it would be pretty safe to say that pfsense will
virtually never be faster than current m0n0wall versions.
~10 Mb makes me think duplex mismatch, that's roughly the best you'll
ever see out of a mismatched 100 Mb interface. Could be a driver
issue in 4.x where autoneg has issues under some limited
circumstances, and the problem is fixed in 6.x. See any interface
errors on the interface status page, or anything in the logs to
indicate some other issue?