<?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 performance problem with pa-3050 in Advanced Threat Prevention Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-threat-prevention/performance-problem-with-pa-3050/m-p/192929#M136</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;We have two ISP related DNS servers with each behind a pa-3020. &amp;nbsp;During peak time we have seen the number of sessions increase to 150K on each pa-3020 so we were concerned that if one DNS server had to take the whole load then the pa-3020 would go over the 256k session limit. &amp;nbsp;We decided that we needed to move the DNS servers each behind a pa-3050. &amp;nbsp;The pa-3020is were running 4-6% cpu on the dataplane. &amp;nbsp;Much to our surprise when each are behind their own pa-3050, the dataplane cpu running 50-60%. &amp;nbsp;So of instead of the dataplane cpu going down, it went up 10 fold. &amp;nbsp;Has anyone else seen this &amp;nbsp;type of performance issue with the pa-3050. &amp;nbsp;Support does not think that there is an issue.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 20:53:59 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>LCMember1876</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-12-22T20:53:59Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>performance problem with pa-3050</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-threat-prevention/performance-problem-with-pa-3050/m-p/192929#M136</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We have two ISP related DNS servers with each behind a pa-3020. &amp;nbsp;During peak time we have seen the number of sessions increase to 150K on each pa-3020 so we were concerned that if one DNS server had to take the whole load then the pa-3020 would go over the 256k session limit. &amp;nbsp;We decided that we needed to move the DNS servers each behind a pa-3050. &amp;nbsp;The pa-3020is were running 4-6% cpu on the dataplane. &amp;nbsp;Much to our surprise when each are behind their own pa-3050, the dataplane cpu running 50-60%. &amp;nbsp;So of instead of the dataplane cpu going down, it went up 10 fold. &amp;nbsp;Has anyone else seen this &amp;nbsp;type of performance issue with the pa-3050. &amp;nbsp;Support does not think that there is an issue.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 20:53:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-threat-prevention/performance-problem-with-pa-3050/m-p/192929#M136</guid>
      <dc:creator>LCMember1876</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-22T20:53:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: performance problem with pa-3050</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-threat-prevention/performance-problem-with-pa-3050/m-p/192936#M137</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;While I have not seen this in the past. There must be a reson for it. I would open a tech support case and have them look over the processes and config.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 21:30:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-threat-prevention/performance-problem-with-pa-3050/m-p/192936#M137</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-22T21:30:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

