<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Panorama Logging in AWS - Different Volume Types in Panorama Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/panorama-discussions/panorama-logging-in-aws-different-volume-types/m-p/537898#M1465</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;According to the support documentation on implementing Panorama in AWS and attaching a virtual disk, the instructions indicate that we should use the GP2 volume type for general purposes. &lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/panorama/10-1/panorama-admin/set-up-panorama/set-up-the-panorama-virtual-appliance/expand-log-storage-capacity-on-the-panorama-virtual-appliance/add-a-virtual-disk-to-panorama-on-aws" target="_self"&gt;Here&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;We're wanting to evaluate whether Panorama Logging supports using GP3 instance types instead of GP2 so we can save cost on our storage volume. From what I can tell, the considerations are IOPs and Throughput. Can someone help point me in the right direction of evaluating what our requirements concerning these factors are? Is there an IOPs / throughput calculator or formula already made? Also, is using the GP3 volume type even supported? If not, then this endeavor is moot to begin with.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/storage/migrate-your-amazon-ebs-volumes-from-gp2-to-gp3-and-save-up-to-20-on-costs/" target="_blank"&gt;Migrate your Amazon EBS volumes from gp2 to gp3 and save up to 20% on costs | AWS Storage Blog&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2023 14:55:25 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>asiler1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-04-06T14:55:25Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Panorama Logging in AWS - Different Volume Types</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/panorama-discussions/panorama-logging-in-aws-different-volume-types/m-p/537898#M1465</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;According to the support documentation on implementing Panorama in AWS and attaching a virtual disk, the instructions indicate that we should use the GP2 volume type for general purposes. &lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/panorama/10-1/panorama-admin/set-up-panorama/set-up-the-panorama-virtual-appliance/expand-log-storage-capacity-on-the-panorama-virtual-appliance/add-a-virtual-disk-to-panorama-on-aws" target="_self"&gt;Here&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;We're wanting to evaluate whether Panorama Logging supports using GP3 instance types instead of GP2 so we can save cost on our storage volume. From what I can tell, the considerations are IOPs and Throughput. Can someone help point me in the right direction of evaluating what our requirements concerning these factors are? Is there an IOPs / throughput calculator or formula already made? Also, is using the GP3 volume type even supported? If not, then this endeavor is moot to begin with.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/storage/migrate-your-amazon-ebs-volumes-from-gp2-to-gp3-and-save-up-to-20-on-costs/" target="_blank"&gt;Migrate your Amazon EBS volumes from gp2 to gp3 and save up to 20% on costs | AWS Storage Blog&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2023 14:55:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/panorama-discussions/panorama-logging-in-aws-different-volume-types/m-p/537898#M1465</guid>
      <dc:creator>asiler1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-04-06T14:55:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

