Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

VMware Exam 5V0-21.21 Topic 6 Question 72 Discussion

Actual exam question for VMware's 5V0-21.21 exam
Question #: 72
Topic #: 6
[All 5V0-21.21 Questions]

data centers, the customer relayed the following information:

* Highest possible mitigation during a host failure in terms of capacity.

* A constraint in this year's IT budget.

What should the architect recommend?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer

Contribute your Thoughts:

Isreal
2 months ago
Option D? Really? Who wants to run their data center on a ROBO cluster? This isn't a lemonade stand, people!
upvoted 0 times
Corinne
1 months ago
C) Enable performance services. A minimum cluster of 6 vSAN nodes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lang
1 months ago
B) Enable host build reserve. A minimum cluster of 4 vSAN nodes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mable
1 months ago
A) Enable operations reserve. A minimum cluster of 3 vSAN nodes.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Elizabeth
2 months ago
Why do you think option B is better?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ariel
2 months ago
Performance is nice, but do we really need that level of overkill? I'd go with the more budget-friendly Option B.
upvoted 0 times
Toi
1 months ago
User 3: Option B it is then, let's go with that recommendation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cristal
1 months ago
User 2: Yeah, I think having a minimum cluster of 4 vSAN nodes should provide enough mitigation during a host failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Darnell
1 months ago
Carli: Sounds good, let's make sure we stay within this year's IT budget.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jamal
1 months ago
I agree, Option B seems like the best choice considering the budget constraint.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thurman
2 months ago
Option B it is then, let's go with the minimum cluster of 4 vSAN nodes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carli
2 months ago
Yeah, we don't want to overspend on unnecessary performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Blythe
2 months ago
I agree, Option B seems like the best choice for our budget.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Luis
2 months ago
I disagree, I believe option B is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Deangelo
3 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. Shouldn't we prioritize performance over cost? Maybe Option C with 6 vSAN nodes is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
Pamella
2 months ago
Agreed, let's go with that recommendation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Von
2 months ago
Option C with 6 vSAN nodes seems like a good choice then.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nidia
2 months ago
I think we should prioritize performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Elizabeth
3 months ago
I think we should go with option A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yun
3 months ago
I agree with Lauran. Option B seems like the best balance between cost and mitigation during host failures.
upvoted 0 times
Ronnie
1 months ago
Let's go with Option B for the recommendation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominque
1 months ago
Option B it is then.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorian
2 months ago
I agree, Option B provides a good balance between cost and mitigation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gracie
2 months ago
I think Option B is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lauran
3 months ago
Option B makes the most sense to me. A minimum of 4 vSAN nodes should provide the necessary capacity and redundancy while staying within the budget constraint.
upvoted 0 times
Norah
2 months ago
Yeah, having a minimum cluster of 4 vSAN nodes should ensure high mitigation during a host failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beula
2 months ago
I agree, option B seems like the best choice for balancing capacity and budget constraints.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77