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

VMware 2V0-32.22 Exam - Topic 3 Question 28 Discussion

Posted by Dallas on May 26, 2026 at 01:53 PM

Forty days ago, an administrator provisioned a Virtual Machine (vm-01) in preparation for a new project. The project has now been delayed due to budgetary constraints. As part of the monthly service management checks, a second administrator executes the reclaim action on all idle virtual machines and vm-01 is listed. The second administrator accidentally reclaims all idle virtual machines including vm-01.

What action can the administrator complete to prevent this scenario from happening again?

Suggested Answer: D

Questions no: 3 Verified Answer = D Comprehensive Detailed Explanation with all VMware Reference = To prevent the accidental reclamation of recently provisioned VMs, the administrator should increase the default value of the 'Exclude VM provisioned in the last x days' setting. This setting determines the period during which newly provisioned VMs are excluded from reclamation analysis. By increasing this value, the administrator can ensure that VMs provisioned for new projects are not inadvertently reclaimed .

Here's why the other options are not the best solution:

A . Create a dynamic group with membership based on vSphere tags so that all new virtual machines are included and then exclude the entire group from reclaim analysis. While this approach can be effective, it requires additional configuration and management of dynamic groups and vSphere tags. Increasing the 'Exclude VM provisioned in the last x days' setting is a simpler and more direct solution.

B . Disable Capacity reclamation on the policy applied to new virtual machines. Disabling capacity reclamation entirely would prevent vRealize Operations from identifying and reclaiming any idle resources on those VMs, which may not be desirable.

C . Create a new policy that disables the capacity reclamation on the policy and apply the policy to the parent object hosting new virtual machines. Similar to option B, this would disable capacity reclamation for all VMs under the parent object, which may be too broad and prevent the reclamation of other idle resources.


Get Premium 2V0-32.22 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
17 comments · newest first
NG
Nguyet 1 month ago
A feels more proactive. We need to think ahead.
BU
Buck 1 month ago
C allows for specific targeting. I like that approach.
AL
Alaine 1 month ago
B is quick, but might not prevent future mistakes.
PE
Pete 2 months ago
A covers future VMs well. Good long-term solution.
TI
Tiffiny 2 months ago
D is risky. What if we forget to adjust it later?
TA
Tammi 2 months ago
C could work too. A new policy gives more control.
LA
Lawana 2 months ago
I agree, but B seems simpler. Just disable reclamation.
AH
Ahmed 2 months ago
I think option A is the best. Dynamic groups are flexible.
EL
Elmira 2 months ago
C might be overkill for this situation, just disable reclamation!
CO
Colby 3 months ago
I think D could work too, but not sure if it's the best choice.
BA
Barney 3 months ago
Wait, can you really reclaim a VM that's only 40 days old?
SI
Simona 3 months ago
I disagree, B seems simpler to implement.
DA
Daniel 3 months ago
Option A sounds like a solid plan!
LE
Lemuel 3 months ago
I think creating a new policy might be the safest bet, but I’m not clear on how that interacts with existing policies.
MI
Micah 4 months ago
I feel like increasing the exclude days could help, but what if the project gets delayed again?
EU
Eun 4 months ago
I remember practicing a question about disabling capacity reclamation, but I can't recall if it was about policies or just general settings.
MA
Mabel 4 months ago
I think option A sounds familiar, but I'm not entirely sure how dynamic groups work with vSphere tags.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel