An administrator has enabled the allocation model in a policy and set the CPU overcommit ratio to 4:1 for all vSphere clusters in a vSphere datacenter. Why would vRealize Operations report that the…

Question

Options

• AThe allocation model will always report zero remaining capacity when the actual ratio is less than
• BThe allocation model does not account for powered off virtual machines.
• CThe CPU demand in the cluster is less than the total CPU capacity.
• DThe CPU demand in the cluster is greater than the total CPU capacity.

• A
  15% (6)
• B
  5% (2)
• C
  8% (3)
• D
  73% (29)

Explanation

Option D is correct because when actual CPU demand exceeds total physical CPU capacity, vRealize Operations immediately flags the cluster as having zero remaining capacity - regardless of what the allocation policy says. The overcommit ratio governs how much you can allocate on paper, but if the VMs that are already running are consuming more CPU than the cluster physically has, the cluster is already saturated and no time remains before a problem exists.

Why the distractors fail:

• A is wrong because the allocation model does not always report zero remaining - it only does so when a capacity threshold is actually breached, not as a blanket rule.
• B is wrong because the allocation model does account for powered-off VMs (their vCPU allocations still count against capacity even when idle).
• C is the opposite scenario - if demand were less than capacity, there would be headroom remaining, not zero days.

Memory tip: Think of the overcommit ratio as your paper budget and demand as your actual spending. You can have a generous paper budget (4:1 ratio with low actual allocation) but still be bankrupt if your real spending (demand) already exceeds your income (physical CPU). "Allocation says fine, demand says broke" = 0 days remaining.

No community discussion yet for this question.