«

Hello,

I foud on the Cisco website that the PIX 506E is not able to add more memory
in it. Though for the bigger 500 series it is available...

When i opened the PIX 506E (because the CPU cooler was too dry, done now
again) i saw 2 memory banks, 1 filled with an 32Mb SDRAM (133mhz) module.
When i add another 64MB SDRAM (133mhz) module the system counts to 96MB so
it seems to be working, though the system recognizes the memory.

Now my question is the PIX 506E using the added 64Mb...? Will it be an
advantage to add more RAM to the 506E...?

Thanks,
Michiel

You can check it by

Sh memory cmmand

sh memory


Michiel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I foud on the Cisco website that the PIX 506E is not able to add more memory
> in it. Though for the bigger 500 series it is available...
>
> When i opened the PIX 506E (because the CPU cooler was too dry, done now
> again) i saw 2 memory banks, 1 filled with an 32Mb SDRAM (133mhz) module.
> When i add another 64MB SDRAM (133mhz) module the system counts to 96MB so
> it seems to be working, though the system recognizes the memory.
>
> Now my question is the PIX 506E using the added 64Mb...? Will it be an
> advantage to add more RAM to the 506E...?
>
> Thanks,
> Michiel

Hello,

In PDM i can also see the status online... i see that when i have the 32MB
module in it the free memory is 16MB... And when i add the 64MB module then
probably more memory would be free... ...

But i am just wondering...

Like Windows XP when you insert an additional 256MB on the installed 256MB
the system is running smoother... is that also what will happen with the
PIX...? hehe... Or is it purely depending on the amount of memory free...
for example if the memory reaches below 1MB the system is slowing down...?

Thanks,
Michiel


"NETADMIN" <> schreef in bericht
news: oups.com...
> You can check it by
>
> Sh memory cmmand
>
> sh memory
>
>
> Michiel wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I foud on the Cisco website that the PIX 506E is not able to add more
>> memory
>> in it. Though for the bigger 500 series it is available...
>>
>> When i opened the PIX 506E (because the CPU cooler was too dry, done now
>> again) i saw 2 memory banks, 1 filled with an 32Mb SDRAM (133mhz) module.
>> When i add another 64MB SDRAM (133mhz) module the system counts to 96MB
>> so
>> it seems to be working, though the system recognizes the memory.
>>
>> Now my question is the PIX 506E using the added 64Mb...? Will it be an
>> advantage to add more RAM to the 506E...?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Michiel
>

In article <44ec609a$0$16660$ l>,
Michiel <> wrote:
>But i am just wondering...

>Like Windows XP when you insert an additional 256MB on the installed 256MB
>the system is running smoother... is that also what will happen with the
>PIX...? hehe... Or is it purely depending on the amount of memory free...
>for example if the memory reaches below 1MB the system is slowing down...?

On the PIX, if you have enough memory for everything that is
currently active, then more memory does not speed things up.

On many operating systems (not PIX, but I don't know about XP), once
you have enough memory to handle everything this is running simultaneously,
adding more memory just changes the point at which you could run
even -more- simultaneously. I say "not PIX" because PIX allocates
all the memory it needs for the OS at the same time, and then more
memory mostly just controls the number of connections (and translations)
you can have simultaneously.

It is true that if you are -very- short on memory then with most OS's
(including PIX), operations slow down as the OS has to look harder to
find free memory for whatever it wants to do. Usually, though, a few
hundred Kb is more than enough.

There is a way that XP could potentially run more smoothly with
extra memory. I don't know if XP does this, but I know SGI's IRIX
operating system does. If you have extra memory hanging around, then
the operating system can take it and use it as a disk cache, storing
the most-used files completely in memory, so that the next time they
are requested they do not have to be fetched from disk. I have not
seen any evidence that XP does this, but I am not an XP expert by
any means, so I might have been looking in completely the wrong place.


On the PIX 506E, there is something that extra memory can help with.
If you have the memory, then you can use "turbo ACLs" (compiled ACLs).
That is a mechanism that the PIX can use to figure out in a short
sequence whether or not any particular packet matches an access
control list. When compiled ACLs are not used, the PIX must start
at the beginning of the list and go through each step in sequence
until it finds the step that matches (or gets to the end);
with compiled ACLs, it can do it without having to search the list.
The PIX 506E allows ACLs to be compiled if the ACL contains at least
19 lines (below that it is faster to search the list sequentially.)

Ahh... ok thanks i understand...

I found out that with the 32MB memory the system is running and having total
15MB free of memory, but when i add the additional 64MB then i have 52MB
free memory... so the system probably is using it... speeding...? not
sure... i must say the connections are very fast... though i will try to
find out the upcomming days and also by adding even more memory, to see what
the system does...

About the TurboACLs... how do i do that...? It sounds good... because i have
many rules in the PIX... more than 19... hehe...

Sincerely,
Michiel


"Walter Roberson" <> wrote in message
news:tt7Hg.447918$iF6.215427@pd7tw2no...
> In article <44ec609a$0$16660$ l>,
> Michiel <> wrote:
>>But i am just wondering...
>
>>Like Windows XP when you insert an additional 256MB on the installed 256MB
>>the system is running smoother... is that also what will happen with the
>>PIX...? hehe... Or is it purely depending on the amount of memory
>>free...
>>for example if the memory reaches below 1MB the system is slowing down...?
>
> On the PIX, if you have enough memory for everything that is
> currently active, then more memory does not speed things up.
>
> On many operating systems (not PIX, but I don't know about XP), once
> you have enough memory to handle everything this is running
> simultaneously,
> adding more memory just changes the point at which you could run
> even -more- simultaneously. I say "not PIX" because PIX allocates
> all the memory it needs for the OS at the same time, and then more
> memory mostly just controls the number of connections (and translations)
> you can have simultaneously.
>
> It is true that if you are -very- short on memory then with most OS's
> (including PIX), operations slow down as the OS has to look harder to
> find free memory for whatever it wants to do. Usually, though, a few
> hundred Kb is more than enough.
>
> There is a way that XP could potentially run more smoothly with
> extra memory. I don't know if XP does this, but I know SGI's IRIX
> operating system does. If you have extra memory hanging around, then
> the operating system can take it and use it as a disk cache, storing
> the most-used files completely in memory, so that the next time they
> are requested they do not have to be fetched from disk. I have not
> seen any evidence that XP does this, but I am not an XP expert by
> any means, so I might have been looking in completely the wrong place.
>
>
> On the PIX 506E, there is something that extra memory can help with.
> If you have the memory, then you can use "turbo ACLs" (compiled ACLs).
> That is a mechanism that the PIX can use to figure out in a short
> sequence whether or not any particular packet matches an access
> control list. When compiled ACLs are not used, the PIX must start
> at the beginning of the list and go through each step in sequence
> until it finds the step that matches (or gets to the end);
> with compiled ACLs, it can do it without having to search the list.
> The PIX 506E allows ACLs to be compiled if the ACL contains at least
> 19 lines (below that it is faster to search the list sequentially.)

In article <44ee3ed7$0$18162$ l>,
Michiel <> wrote:

>About the TurboACLs... how do i do that...?

access-list ACLNAME compiled