Q: 3
An architect is responsible for designing a VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF)-based private cloud for a
customer. The architect noted the following requirements during a design workshop:
Co-locate application workloads with VCF management component workloads within the same
vSphere cluster.
Shared storage data is always available and 100% current in the event of a single site outage.
Have two sites available no more than 10 miles apart (10ms latency) connected with high-speed
network technology to host their virtual infrastructure.
Protect against outages of a single site designated as an availability zone.
Which two storage technologies could meet the stated requirements? (Choose two.)
Options
Discussion
I'm not fully convinced about vVols unless the storage array has built-in sync replication. Isn't C just standard FC, so it doesn't natively get you zero RPO? Always thought that was the main trap here.
D , vSAN definitely supports the zero RPO sync writes between sites, but E is possible too if the vVols setup is on a storage array with synchronous replication. Not 100% sure about vVols unless backend supports it though.
I’d say D and E-vSAN covers the stretched cluster, active-active sync writes for zero RPO, which is what they mean by "100% current." vVols can also do it if the backing array does synchronous replication. C (VMFS on FC) looks like a trap since it doesn't natively sync between sites. Think this matches VMware design thinking but someone correct me if I missed something.
D and E tbh, both support stretched clusters with sync replication. Not seeing C meeting all the site failover needs.
Guessing D and E, not C. Trap is thinking VMFS/FC can do zero RPO during failover, but it can't without extra sync layer. I think VMware exams still expect vSAN and vVols here, even with those latency details.
Option D and E-trap here is thinking C could work, but it doesn't guarantee zero RPO. Agree?
vvols are deprecated in VCF v9 and vSAN requires a latency of 5ms to have a RTO of 0. How can it be D & E based on these facts?
D and E both make sense, since vSAN natively supports stretched clusters with zero RPO, and vVols can do it if the backend array handles synchronous replication. Standard VMFS/FC doesn't guarantee that by itself. Pretty sure about this but open if someone has seen different in production.
C is wrong here, D and E fit because vSAN and vVols (with proper backend) can deliver zero RPO for a site failure. VMFS on FC doesn't handle sync replication between sites on its own.
D and E imo. Both vSAN and vVols can be used for stretched clusters with synchronous writes, so they cover the zero RPO the question's asking for. Not totally sure about vVols unless the array supports the right replication features but that's usually assumed here.
Be respectful. No spam.
