Nutanix Exam NCS-Core Topic 1 Question 50 Discussion

Actual exam question for Nutanix's NCS-Core exam

Question #: 50
Topic #: 1

An administrator needs to make sure an RF3 cluster can survive a failure of two complete racks without negatively affecting performance. The current cluster configuration consists of the following:

* 30 All Flash Nodes: distributed 10 nodes per rack across three 42U racks

* Each node is configured with 20TB usable storage all flash (Cluster Total 600TB Usable)

* Current cluster utilization is 500TB storage

* Storage containers have Erasure Coding enabled

Which configuration changes should be made to make sure the cluster meets the requirements?

AExpand the cluster to 50 nodes distributed evenly across 5 racks

BExpand the cluster to 48 nodes distributed evenly across 6 racks

CExpand the cluster to 60 nodes distributed evenly across 6 racks

DExpand the cluster to 40 nodes distributed evenly across 5 racks

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

by Venita at Jan 28, 2024, 05:22 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium NCS-Core Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Clement

2 months ago

Wow, this is a real brain-teaser! I bet the answer involves some complex calculations around rack redundancy and storage utilization. I'm just hoping I don't end up with a cluster that's too big to fit in my living room.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gwenn

2 months ago

40 nodes across 5 racks? I don't think that's going to cut it. We need more nodes to handle the loss of two racks. I'm leaning towards the 50 nodes across 5 racks solution.

upvoted 0 times

Katlyn

7 days ago

50 nodes across 5 racks will give us the extra capacity and redundancy required to meet the requirements.

upvoted 0 times

...

Leigha

11 days ago

I think expanding to 50 nodes across 5 racks is the way to go to ensure the cluster can survive the failure of two racks.

upvoted 0 times

...

Talia

24 days ago

Expanding to 50 nodes across 5 racks will provide the redundancy we need in case of a rack failure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sherron

1 months ago

Expanding to 50 nodes across 5 racks is the way to go. It will provide the necessary redundancy to survive the failure of two racks.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kendra

1 months ago

I agree, we definitely need more nodes to handle the loss of two racks. 50 nodes across 5 racks seems like the best option.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ashley

1 months ago

Yeah, we definitely need more nodes to handle the loss of two racks. 50 nodes distributed evenly across 5 racks should do the trick.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kirby

1 months ago

I agree, 50 nodes across 5 racks seems like the best option to ensure the cluster can survive the failure of two racks.

upvoted 0 times

...

Christene

2 months ago

60 nodes across 6 racks? That sounds a bit overkill. I'd go with the 50 nodes across 5 racks option - it should give us the redundancy we need without going overboard.

upvoted 0 times

...

Vinnie

2 months ago

Okay, so we need to make sure the cluster can handle the loss of two racks. Expanding to 48 nodes across 6 racks seems like a solid solution to me.

upvoted 0 times

Lavina

28 days ago

48 nodes across 6 racks would definitely increase the cluster's resilience to rack failures.

upvoted 0 times

...

Alisha

1 months ago

I think option B is the best choice to ensure the cluster can survive the failure of two racks.

upvoted 0 times

...

Arthur

1 months ago

I agree, expanding to 48 nodes across 6 racks should provide the redundancy needed.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shawna

3 months ago

Hmm, the current cluster has 30 nodes across 3 racks, and the question says the requirement is to survive two complete rack failures. I think expanding to 50 nodes across 5 racks would be the best way to meet that requirement.

upvoted 0 times