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

VMware 2V0-16.25 Exam - Topic 5 Question 9 Discussion

An administrator is tasked to create a new storage policy for an eight-node VMware vSAN Original Storage Architecture (OSA) cluster.The following specifications have been provided:Tolerate up to two host failures.Ensure maximum usable capacity.Which storage policy settings must the administrator configure?
B) 2 failures - RAID-5
A) 1 failure - RAID-1
C) 3 failures - RAID-1
D) 1 failure - RAID-5

VMware 2V0-16.25 Exam - Topic 5 Question 9 Discussion

Actual exam question for VMware's 2V0-16.25 exam
Question #: 9
Topic #: 5
[All 2V0-16.25 Questions]

An administrator is tasked to create a new storage policy for an eight-node VMware vSAN Original Storage Architecture (OSA) cluster.

The following specifications have been provided:

Tolerate up to two host failures.

Ensure maximum usable capacity.

Which storage policy settings must the administrator configure?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by John Franklin C at Nov 29, 2025, 05:43 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 2V0-16.25 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Shenika
2 months ago
Yeah, I think we should stick with B for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chaya
3 months ago
Performance is good enough for most workloads. B is solid.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nichelle
3 months ago
I just worry about performance with RAID-5. Is it worth it?
upvoted 0 times
...
Patti
3 months ago
I’m leaning towards B too. It fits the requirements perfectly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Franchesca
3 months ago
Exactly! RAID-5 is efficient for this setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
James
3 months ago
I feel like B is the right balance. Two failures tolerated, more usable space.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chaya
3 months ago
RAID-1 is limited in capacity though. We need more space.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shenika
4 months ago
But isn't RAID-1 safer? Option A seems reliable.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rickie
4 months ago
Agreed, B makes sense for capacity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashon
4 months ago
I think option B is the best choice. RAID-5 can handle two failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lonny
4 months ago
I thought RAID-1 was the standard for failure tolerance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aide
4 months ago
Definitely B, it maximizes capacity while tolerating failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dong
5 months ago
Wait, can RAID-5 really handle two failures?
upvoted 0 times
...
Cheryl
5 months ago
I disagree, RAID-1 is safer for critical data.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
5 months ago
B) 2 failures - RAID-5 is the way to go!
upvoted 0 times
...
Tyisha
5 months ago
I vaguely remember that RAID-5 offers better capacity than RAID-1, but does it really support two failures? I should double-check that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chantell
6 months ago
If we need to tolerate two host failures, I feel like RAID-5 is the right choice, but I’m a bit confused about the maximum usable capacity part.
upvoted 0 times
...
Richelle
6 months ago
Haha, who even uses RAID-1 these days? B is the clear winner.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vilma
6 months ago
B is the correct answer. RAID-5 is the way to go for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynna
6 months ago
I'm going with D. 1 failure - RAID-5 sounds like the best option here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Glory
6 months ago
Definitely B. RAID-5 is the way to go for maximum usable capacity with 2 host failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julio
6 months ago
Hmm, I think the answer is B. 2 failures - RAID-5 seems to meet the requirements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aja
7 months ago
I'm pretty confident that option B is the right answer here. RAID-5 provides the best balance of failure tolerance and capacity utilization for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nan
7 months ago
I'm a little confused about the "maximum usable capacity" requirement. Doesn't RAID-5 typically have lower usable capacity than RAID-1? I'll have to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nelida
7 months ago
Okay, I've got this. The administrator needs to configure a storage policy that can tolerate 2 host failures and provide the maximum usable capacity. That means the answer has to be option B - 2 failures, RAID-5.
upvoted 0 times
...
Francoise
7 months ago
I think we practiced a similar question where RAID-1 was mentioned for single failures, but I can't recall if it applies here for two failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Andrew
7 months ago
I remember something about RAID levels and how they relate to fault tolerance, but I'm not sure if RAID-5 can handle two failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Candida
8 months ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm not totally sure about the differences between RAID-1 and RAID-5 in the context of vSAN. I'll need to review the details on those storage policies.
upvoted 0 times
...
Deeanna
8 months ago
I think the key here is to maximize usable capacity while still being able to tolerate up to two host failures. That rules out options C and D, since they don't match the requirements.
upvoted 0 times
Ettie
16 days ago
Definitely B, RAID-5 is the way to go for that setup!
upvoted 0 times
...
Edna
21 days ago
So, it's between A and B then?
upvoted 0 times
...
Jarvis
26 days ago
Right, we need to focus on maximizing capacity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Val
8 months ago
I agree, options C and D don't fit the criteria.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel