I have attached the screenshot.

If I go to Poller -> Poller management -> Select an already defined Poller (with 20+ devices and 7 templates) -> Edit -> Click Next or Finish, it starts polling and shows the attached screen.

Secondly, is the previous run successful if there are no errors in the Status column. Should all errors be looked into such as instance not available etc.

What templates did you select? What type of devices are in this poller? How heavily loaded is the server? HUM will attempt to walk the various tables (as defined by the templates) to obtain the selected (or all) instances. If the devices are slow to respond to SNMP queries for the tables in question, or the server is heavily loaded, this can take a long time.

Yes, if no errors are seen, then all instances were successfully polled for the previous polling cycle. No such instance errors can point to an SNMP problem on the device, but it could also be that high-capacity counters weren't available for a specific interface, so HUM fell back to low-capacity counters. This is only true for interface utilization.

I have selected CPU, Memory, Interface Utilization, Temperature, Device Availability, Interface Availability, Interface Error templates.

There are 27 devices including ASA, ACE Modules, Cat65K, 2800 Routers, GSS, FWSM.

The server performance seems to be the cause. CPU is constantly 1% but the 'PF Usage' is 5.44 GB. The physical memory on the server is 4GB out of which 500MB is available while the process is running. How can I reduce the PF Usage.

Please find attached the screenshot of Windows Task manager.

PF usage is probably not the issue. The issue most likely stems from time take to poll the devices. If you start a sniffer trace filtering on SNMP traffic to all of the devices in the poller, then trigger the problem, the resulting capture file should shed some light on the delay.

Ok.

In the ASA logs, I see the following in big number

ASA-3-212005: incoming SNMP request (563 bytes) from IP address HUMIP Port 1745 Internet "management" exceeds data buffer size, discarding this SNMP request.

What does this mean ?

The SNMP request is too large for the device to process. This has to do with the number of templates in your poller. Try breaking the templates out into separate pollers (e.g. one poller to handle memory, CPU, and environment, one to handle interface utilization, one to handler errors, and one for availability).

I just added a single ASA device with CPU Utilization only.

The response came soon with

"No instances are found in the devices. This could be because the device is unreachable, or the device does not have the instances for the selected templates or the time out value is low."

Is the default CPU utilization template supported by ASA.

Thanks.

No, it might not. The object used is cpmCPUTotal5minRev which is a new object in the CISCO-PROCESS-MIB (and not support in most versions of ASA code). The old, deprecated object, cpmCPUTotal5min IS supported by all versions of ASA code. You will need to create a new template for this older object, and apply that to your ASA devices.

Is the same applicable to FWSM. I am running version 3.2(2).

I tried cpmCPUTotal5min only with ASA device and it still gives the same response. The ASA code is 8.0(4).

When I do snmpwalk with the ASA device on (.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.109.1.1.1) it returns

CISCO-PROCESS-MIB::cpmCPUTotalPhysicalIndex.1 = INTEGER: 1

CISCO-PROCESS-MIB::cpmCPUTotal5sec.1 = Guage32: 5

CISCO-PROCESS-MIB::cpmCPUTotal1min.1 = Guage32: 5

CISCO-PROCESS-MIB::cpmCPUTotal5min.1 = Guage32: 4

Yet when I create the template with same MIB object, it fails with the poller saying 'No instance available'.

How could this be ?

This is a bug in HUM. HUM is expecting the value of cpmCPUTotalPhysicalIndex to be 0. When it's not, HUM ignores the instance. Unfortunately, there is no workaround at this time.