topic Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB in Spark Firewall (SMB)

R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

HristoGrigorov — Thu, 03 Jan 2019 10:23:32 GMT

Guys,

That build is causing significant traffic delays and CPU load is higher than that of R77.20.81.

Any of you experiencing similar problem ?

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

Naftali_Oziel — Sat, 05 Jan 2019 02:49:22 GMT

Hi, which appliance are you running this on 700/900/1400. Plus which blades to you have enabled?

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

HristoGrigorov — Sat, 05 Jan 2019 14:07:41 GMT

Centrally managed 1470 appliance. FW, VPN, AC/UF, IPS blades. Same configuration is fine on R77.20.81.

Currently one node of the cluster is running 81 and one 85. I flip them over from time to time and as soon as 85 becomes active load average increases well above 1.0 while on 81 it rarely goes up to 0.8.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

Naftali_Oziel — Sat, 05 Jan 2019 14:37:12 GMT

Ok. Thanks. Do you have any standalone (SMB) and those to SMP but in a non-cluster setup? Checking my end to compare stats but am running 1490 using the same blade setup. However, are local managed none central or cluster.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

HristoGrigorov — Mon, 07 Jan 2019 10:42:26 GMT

Sorry, only those two 1470s in a cluster. I don't know why, but that build makes things run really slow. I am going to revert it back to 81 today which is as you know long and painful procedure because flashing previous firmware version is not supported.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

Pedro_Espindola — Mon, 07 Jan 2019 13:24:54 GMT

I have the same problem.

Centrally managed 1470. Build 990172731

Before upgrade, average CPU load was below 20% during work hours. After upgrade, average was at 35% on sunday and now, during work hours, it is peaking at 85%... I can't tell the average, because the gw stops responding to SNMP every few minutes.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

HristoGrigorov — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 04:18:37 GMT

Yesterday, I gave it another try. And users immediately started to complain about network being slow. Switched over to the other member (77.20.81) and everything went back to normal. Btw, 77.20.81 build 541 has exactly the same problem. R77.20.81 build 525 is rock stable and performance is noticeably better. So I am staying with that for the time being.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

HristoGrigorov — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 04:31:22 GMT

R77.20.85:

R77.20.81:

Time frame is: 08:30 AM - 09:30 AM (1 hour) on work days. Same policy.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

Pedro_Espindola — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 18:00:23 GMT

Noticed some instability periods in 541 for centrally managed appliances, but 77.20.85 was way worse and instability seemed to be permanent, not momentary. After reverting to 77.20.81 541 things definitely improved!

Had no issues with 541 in locally managed ones. I didn't test 77.20.85 GA on locally managed appliances.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

G_W_Albrecht — Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:33:16 GMT

Strange - one of our customers has reported performance gains after changing from R77.20.81 to R77.20.85 on a single SMB GW.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

HristoGrigorov — Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:40:53 GMT

That's interesting. Is it locally or centrally managed ?

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

G_W_Albrecht — Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:51:37 GMT

That is a locally managed SMB unit, so there is much difference to your environment.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue

HristoGrigorov — Thu, 10 Jan 2019 12:02:10 GMT

Yes, it seems issue is only on centrally managed SMBs.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

Pedro_Espindola — Thu, 10 Jan 2019 13:29:13 GMT

Did you open tickets with TAC about this build? And what about Build 541? Did they say anything?

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

HristoGrigorov — Thu, 10 Jan 2019 13:36:24 GMT

I am sorry, I don't have time for that at the moment. I am tackling another SR with TAC at the moment. I just reverted back so not actually using it at the moment.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

Naftali_Oziel — Fri, 11 Jan 2019 16:41:49 GMT

locally managed is also running into issues from a GUI performance getting timeout error msg. As for actual traffic don't believe there is an impact.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

HristoGrigorov — Sat, 12 Jan 2019 04:19:57 GMT

Thanx for sharing. The poor GUI performance was one of the reasons I went for central management. I am so far very satisfied with 81. It performs beautifully here even with HTTPS inspection enabled. I checked again 85 release notes and there is nothing interesting for me that was changed. I'd love to see some features from R80.20 incorporated into SMB firmware but that is not likely to happen.

Once we solve together with R&D that nasty SecureXL problem with static routes I will be very happy with what SMB is

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

G_W_Albrecht — Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:05:55 GMT

Yes, it is not recommended to keep a GUI connection open without doing any configuration changes. WebGUI is not really a tool for monitoring as it uses too many ressources on a unit that does not have much...

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

Naftali_Oziel — Mon, 14 Jan 2019 13:30:40 GMT

GUI has latency/timeout issues even on configuration. Believe this is all related to the new features added and simply will require optimization. This issue occurred a few revisions back, can't recall which one. Hopefully another build will be released to address all these shortly as I'd like to upgrade to production system.

Re: R77.20.85 performance issue on centrally managed SMB

KAPIL_RANA — Mon, 14 Jan 2019 14:23:59 GMT

I have the same problem. 77.20.80 ruining well but after updating 77.20.81 or 77.20.85 hang networ and

cpu load 90 or 100 %

Before update cpu load 20 %

Locally managed 1470