MENU
Your customer needs a compute solution. Their aging data center can only supply 5kW per rack, which is below the 15kW required for your planned solution.
Which change could you recommend to satisfy the requirement while maintaining the planned solution's level of performance? (Choose two.)
36 comments · newest first
YA
Yan
11 months ago
HPE GreenLake pay-per-use is interesting, but is it really cost-effective?
AL
Alysa
11 months ago
Wait, can you really cap power consumption like that?
RO
Rosita
11 months ago
Non-redundant power supplies? That seems risky.
CA
Casandra
12 months ago
Agree, colocation could be a solid option too!
DO
Dorian
12 months ago
Spreading the infrastructure across additional racks sounds smart.
BR
Brynn
12 months ago
Hosting with a colocation provider sounds like a solid option, especially if they can handle the power requirements better than the current setup.
JO
Jolene
1 year ago
Using BMC tools to cap power seems risky; I feel like it might affect performance too much, but I can't recall the specifics.
CL
Cletus
1 year ago
I think spreading the infrastructure across additional racks could work, similar to a practice question we did about load balancing.
CR
Cristal
1 year ago
I remember we discussed power supply options in class, but I'm not sure if non-redundant supplies would really help in this case.
DU
Dulce
1 year ago
I'm a bit confused by the question. I'll need to review the details carefully and think through the potential solutions before making a decision.
SH
Sharika
1 year ago
Hosting the solution with a colocation provider or converting to a pay-per-use model like HPE GreenLake could be viable alternatives. I'll need to weigh the pros and cons of each.
JE
Jeffrey
1 year ago
Spreading the infrastructure across additional racks seems like a good option to consider. That could help distribute the power load more effectively.
MI
Mitzie
1 year ago
This is a tricky one. I'll need to think carefully about the power requirements and how to maintain the planned solution's performance.
SH
Shawnna
1 year ago
Hmm, the power supply limitation is a real challenge. I'm not sure if going with non-redundant power supplies or capping the power consumption is the best approach here.
IS
Isabelle
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused. Do I need to create a custom widget, or can I use the built-in options? I want to make sure I understand the requirements correctly.
BR
Brent
1 year ago
Haha, I'd love to see the look on the customer's face if you suggested going with the 'non-redundant power' option. That's a surefire way to get them to reconsider the entire project!
IR
Ira
1 year ago
User 3: I don't think the customer would go for non-redundant power supplies, that might be a tough sell.
LA
Lachelle
1 year ago
User 2: That could work, but what about hosting the compute solution with a colocation provider?
BR
Brittani
1 year ago
User 1: Maybe we should consider spreading the infrastructure across additional racks.
BU
Bulah
1 year ago
Opting for non-redundant power supplies (option A) is a definite no-go. That would be a major reliability and availability concern.
LY
Lyndia
2 years ago
Hmm, capping the power consumption at 33% with BMC tools (option B) seems a bit risky. Wouldn't that significantly impact the solution's performance?
TO
Tomas
1 year ago
Merlyn: That's true, both options C and D could help meet the power requirement without sacrificing performance.
AN
Annabelle
1 year ago
User 3: Hosting the compute solution with a colocation provider (option D) could also be a good alternative.
ME
Merlyn
1 year ago
User 2: Maybe spreading the infrastructure across additional racks (option C) could be a better solution.
MA
Marshall
1 year ago
User 1: I agree, capping the power consumption at 33% could definitely impact performance.
KI
King
2 years ago
Option E, converting to HPE GreenLake, could also be a good choice. That way, the power and infrastructure management becomes the provider's responsibility.
JU
Justine
1 year ago
D) Host the compute solution with a colocation provider.
JU
Justine
1 year ago
A) Design the solution with non-redundant power supplies.
IZ
Izetta
2 years ago
C and D seem like the most reasonable options here. Spreading the infrastructure across additional racks and hosting with a colocation provider would allow you to work within the power constraints of the current data center.
MA
Margot
1 year ago
Agreed. Hosting with a colocation provider can also help us meet the power requirements.
AL
Alpha
1 year ago
That makes sense. By spreading across more racks, we can stay within the power limits.
SC
Scarlet
1 year ago
D) Host the compute solution with a colocation provider.
CA
Carol
1 year ago
C) Spread the infrastructure across additional racks.
EM
Emmanuel
2 years ago
I would also consider hosting the compute solution with a colocation provider as another option.
PA
Paulene
2 years ago
I agree with Merilyn. That way we can satisfy the requirement without compromising performance.
ME
Merilyn
2 years ago
I think we should spread the infrastructure across additional racks.