Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
+  pfSense Forum
|-+  pfSense English Support» Hardware» Which size NanoBSD embedded would you like to see us ship for 1.2.3?
Username:
Password:
 
 

Poll
Question: Which size NanoBSD embedded would you like to see us ship for 1.2.3?
1GB - 48 (27.7%)
2GB - 29 (16.8%)
4GB - 96 (55.5%)
Total Voters: 173

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Which size NanoBSD embedded would you like to see us ship for 1.2.3?  (Read 6849 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
sullrich
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile WWW
« on: June 29, 2009, 01:59:08 pm »

NanoBSD basically breaks the size into 3 partitions.   So if you have a 1GB card you would end up with 2 - 450 megabyte partitions + the configuration storage area.

We plan on support packages in NanoBSD so choose your size well!

Oh, you cannot even find anything smaller than 4GB at most stores such as wal-mart, best-buy, etc now.
Logged

Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/sullrich

pfSense Commercial Support

Paying customers receive support priority and detailed answers through the official commercial support channels, forum users receive as much help as time permits.
jimp
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 1806



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2009, 02:07:31 pm »

There is some more discussion on NanoBSD in this thread as well:
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,16792.0.html

4GB cards are reasonably cheap ($15-25) and easy to get ahold of.

Now would also be a good time to ensure that your CF card has good wear leveling.
Logged

Co-Author of pfSense: The Definitive Guide.

Need help fast? Try Commercial Support.

Also check the Doc Wiki for additional information.
zcline
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2009, 02:25:10 pm »

So does this mean my little 512MB card won't be supported anymore? 
Logged
ktims
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 284



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2009, 02:26:51 pm »

I voted 1GB. For proper industrial flash, I find that 4GB cards are about 3x more expensive than 1GB cards, at around $100 a piece. That's a little too rich for me when the rest of the hardware I'm likely to use has a similar combined cost, this will make my average install about 30% more expensive. The difference between 512MB and 1GB cards is relatively small, but jumping to 2GB almost doubles the 1GB price.

Besides, I see little use for lots of extra storage other than installing a few packages which are probably a few MB each at most. Running a Squid cache or such off CF just doesn't make sense to me.
Logged
sandman06
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2009, 02:27:29 pm »

make it as big as you like. i have a 16gb cf card.
 
but out of choice from there, i would have to go with 4gb. so there is a degree of flexibility of packages to be installed.

memory cards have become really cheap. 1gb and 2gb are not really worth it tbh
Logged
Briantist
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 87


The professor does not approve of your post.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2009, 02:28:11 pm »

When you guys say CF card do you specifically mean Compact Flash, or are you referring to any kind of flash memory? I have thought about using the embedded version of pfSense but I dont have a lot of experience with it because having it embedded was never more important than package support for me, so I apologize if this question is ignorant.
Logged
ktims
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 284



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2009, 02:31:38 pm »

When you guys say CF card do you specifically mean Compact Flash, or are you referring to any kind of flash memory? I have thought about using the embedded version of pfSense but I dont have a lot of experience with it because having it embedded was never more important than package support for me, so I apologize if this question is ignorant.
The question applies to any embedded install, regardless of what media you install it on. We're mentioning CF because it's almost always the media you use on embedded platforms like ALIX, WRAP, Soekris, repurposed security appliances etc. But it applies to anyone wanting to use the nanoBSD embedded images.
Logged
Briantist
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 87


The professor does not approve of your post.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2009, 02:34:13 pm »

Got it, thanks. I just wasn't sure if there was anything specific to CF that was important. After reading your previous post, I am also curious about what you mean by industrial CF. The price tag seems way up there, so I assume it must be very robust, reliable, etc.
Logged
jimp
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 1806



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2009, 02:34:48 pm »

I voted 1GB. For proper industrial flash, I find that 4GB cards are about 3x more expensive than 1GB cards, at around $100 a piece. That's a little too rich for me when the rest of the hardware I'm likely to use has a similar combined cost, this will make my average install about 30% more expensive. The difference between 512MB and 1GB cards is relatively small, but jumping to 2GB almost doubles the 1GB price.

Besides, I see little use for lots of extra storage other than installing a few packages which are probably a few MB each at most. Running a Squid cache or such off CF just doesn't make sense to me.

Since there won't be enough data on the drive to fill up 4GB or even 2GB (or 1GB...) Someone could probably alter the current embedded image resizing script to make whichever custom-size image you want. Of course the upgrade slices would also need to be resized, but if you're running industrial hardware you probably aren't upgrading them on a whim anyhow. Smiley
Logged

Co-Author of pfSense: The Definitive Guide.

Need help fast? Try Commercial Support.

Also check the Doc Wiki for additional information.
cmb
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2009, 03:05:40 pm »

We're going to have to put out multiple sized images.  512 MB will be the minimum, and we'll need options for 1, 2, 4, and 8 GB. Embedded can't be one size fits all, especially with package support.
Logged

pfSense Commercial Support

Paying customers receive support priority and as in depth of assistance as desired through the official commercial support channels at portal.pfsense.org. Forum users receive as much help as time permits.
sullrich
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2009, 06:00:18 pm »

Kinda surprised to see 4GB winning so far
Logged

Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/sullrich

pfSense Commercial Support

Paying customers receive support priority and detailed answers through the official commercial support channels, forum users receive as much help as time permits.
Björn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 29, 2009, 06:09:32 pm »

Still, it would be nice to have a 512MB version.
Logged
sullrich
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 29, 2009, 06:11:17 pm »

With 1 gig cards being so cheap these days...   Remember nanobsd takes the space and divides it into 2 partitions (3 if you count the config partition).  So you end up with 2 240 meg program areas.  Almost not even enough to accept the upgrade file and leave ample wiggle room.

EDIT: updated the correct space of each partition
« Last Edit: June 29, 2009, 06:22:01 pm by sullrich » Logged

Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/sullrich

pfSense Commercial Support

Paying customers receive support priority and detailed answers through the official commercial support channels, forum users receive as much help as time permits.
danderemer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 29, 2009, 10:12:43 pm »

Would it be possible for some kind of installation mechanism that takes into account the type and capacity of media you are trying to use and partition accordingly?
Logged
sullrich
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: June 29, 2009, 10:21:56 pm »

Would it be possible for some kind of installation mechanism that takes into account the type and capacity of media you are trying to use and partition accordingly?

We have considered it but unlikely for the first version.  It's a lot of work and adds a lot of room for error on 1.2.3.
Logged

Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/sullrich

pfSense Commercial Support

Paying customers receive support priority and detailed answers through the official commercial support channels, forum users receive as much help as time permits.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

 

Page created in 0.164 seconds with 21 queries.