Slow Boot New Install of 6.1

[tcjmiami]

My system takes 7 minutes to boot.
Is this normal?

My hardware is:
1u Rackable System
Intel Server Mother board.
Bios WD 84510A.86B.0015.P08

P4 2.4 GHZ
1 gb Ram
40 GB IDE hard drive

I have installed Version 6.1
Build 6.1.0-SVR20090410r22859release6.1-1 lenny

This system had been running for months with no problems.
It froze during an automatic upgrade so I fired up the backup and wiped this system out.
The automatic install worked with no problems.
The only issue seems to be the slow boot.

I currently do not have anything hooked to the internal interface.

I downloaded and installed the software package successfully.

The sequence is:
20 seconds Untangle splash screen.
40 Seconds 1/3 of green bar as bottom of splash screen
45 Seconds 1/2 of green bar
2 minutes 2/3 of bar
2 1/2 minutes 90% of bar
7 minutes Untangle Button bar.

A system shutdown after boot takes 40 seconds



Thank you for any help you can supply.

TOM

[Skathen]

you're not the only one, mine's much the same now, 6.0.2 took less than 2-3 minutes, it was like a standard PC reboot, now, its reboot and waaaaaaiiiiittttttt...........

[tcjmiami]

you're not the only one, mine's much the same now, 6.0.2 took less than 2-3 minutes, it was like a standard PC reboot, now, its reboot and waaaaaaiiiiittttttt...........

Sense this was my only reply - I am going to assume that this is normal and put this machine back in service.

I turned off update on by backup untangle server to avoid the same problem so I will bring it back to office and do a wipe and install on it as well.

TOM

[lschafroth]

I have it running on AMD 3Ghz with 1.5Gb ram and a 40Gb drive and it boots slow as well but only takes 2 minutes total.

Lannie

[eolson1001]

I've noticed that 6.1 is MUCH slower booting than previous versions on the same machine as well. I don't know what could have changed from 6 to 6.1 to make it so much slower.

[proactivens]

Put it on a quad core xeon server, it'll boot quick enough.

[tcjmiami]

Put it on a quad core xeon server, it'll boot quick enough.

I have several of these servers running.

The majority of them are installed with one hot box and one cold standby.

I use recycled 1U servers to make this an attractive by cost alternative for my customers.

Upgrading the hardware to handle this upgrade is not an attractive prospect.

It's very hard to imagine what could require a quad processor box to run a basically slow process such as a firewall router for a small (3mbs or less) installation.

I can handle the slow boot if that is all that is changed.

The concern that I have is that there is an actual problem with the core services that will either impair or disable the functionality of the machine.

TOM

[raditude]

I as well noticed the boot time increase with 6.1, my concern regardless if you throw big $$$ at it with over-the-top hardware for a lot of instulations is the question of being secure during this process.

It seems there is a period of time (regardless if some hardware boots in 2min or 5min) at which traffic is passing through to/from the LAN, which makes me pause at the increased exposure for this time.

[tcjmiami]

I as well noticed the boot time increase with 6.1, my concern regardless if you throw big $$$ at it with over-the-top hardware for a lot of instulations is the question of being secure during this process.

It seems there is a period of time (regardless if some hardware boots in 2min or 5min) at which traffic is passing through to/from the LAN, which makes me pause at the increased exposure for this time.

The slow start up is not really a concern in my humble opinion because I will be using a complete cold standby.

I believe in KISS (keep it simple stupid) my start up proceadure is to turn on the backup, wait ten minutes, then move the two color coded ethernet cables from one identical 1U box to the other. This solution is simple enough that I can walk my clients through it over the phone.

I alternate between the two boxes on a monthly basis to keep them up to date.

Keeping one box turned off also means that you have an older copy of the software just in case there is a problem with an upgrade (not that it ever happens).

If the company needs immeadiate failover they need a hot standby that supports the failure, and as we all know this is an order of magnitude more money than an open source solution.

I am running the box at my house as we speak (and type) and will leave it here for a few days to obtain a "warm and fuzzy" feeling about the new version.

BTW I have watching the CPU utilization and it does not seem to be high under normal running load.

TOM

[proactivens]

You get what you pay for. Compare untangle to any of the big players in the market, cisco, sonicwall, ect. Your getting enterprise class firewall services, plus a boat load more. Your telling me that $850-1000 is too much to spend on hardware to run it? Go out and get a cisco or a sonic wall solution for that price, with these features. I dare you.