Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

IBM Exam C1000-140 Topic 6 Question 39 Discussion

Actual exam question for IBM's C1000-140 exam
Question #: 39
Topic #: 6
[All C1000-140 Questions]

A deployment professional is about to add a secondary appliance to a QRadar high availability deployment. It is confirmed that both the primary and the secondary appliances are on the same QRadar version. However, the hardware configuration of both appliances is different.

What must be confirmed before adding the secondary appliance to the high availability deployment?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

by Jamal at Jul 03, 2024, 05:57 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium C1000-140 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Latia
10 months ago
Ah, the age-old question: how many partitions does it take to screw in a high availability deployment? The answer, of course, is D - the one that makes the most sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gail
10 months ago
Wait, is this a trick question? I bet the answer is A, but only if the primary host is a supercomputer and the secondary is a toaster.
upvoted 0 times
Buffy
9 months ago
Karina: Hmm, you might be right. Let's double check before making any changes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karina
9 months ago
I'm not so sure, I think it might be A because of the combined size requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alethea
10 months ago
I think the answer is D, the sizes of the partitions need to match up.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jerry
11 months ago
Is the answer really that obvious? It's gotta be C. The primary host needs more interfaces to handle the additional traffic.
upvoted 0 times
Harris
10 months ago
No, I'm pretty sure it's A. The combined size of the partitions on the primary host must be larger than the secondary host's /store partition.
upvoted 0 times
...
Avery
10 months ago
I think it's actually D. The size of the partitions on the secondary host needs to be equal or larger than the primary host.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Mirta
11 months ago
I'm going with B. The secondary host should use a different management interface to ensure redundancy and failover.
upvoted 0 times
Lavelle
10 months ago
Makes sense, it's all about ensuring the system can handle any failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Heidy
10 months ago
Definitely, it's a key factor in high availability deployments.
upvoted 0 times
...
Willodean
10 months ago
I agree, having a different management interface is crucial for failover.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sang
11 months ago
I think B is the correct option. It's important for redundancy.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jacinta
11 months ago
Hmm, I think the answer is D. The secondary host's storage capacity needs to be at least as large as the primary's to handle the workload.
upvoted 0 times
Earlean
10 months ago
Agreed, it's important for the secondary host to handle the workload.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rex
10 months ago
I think the answer is D too. The storage capacity needs to match.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Tambra
11 months ago
I'm not sure about the physical interfaces, but I think we should focus on the partition sizes as mentioned in option A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
11 months ago
I agree with Edgar. Option A seems to be the correct answer because the primary host must have larger combined partitions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edgar
11 months ago
I think we need to confirm the size of the /store and /transient partitions on both hosts.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel