Which configuration is required to create a successful High Availability cluster?

Question

Options

• ATwo managed hosts of the same type (e.g. Event Collectors)
• BA primary of any type and an equivalent dedicated secondary appliance
• CA console and two hosts, one of which must be converted to a secondary appliance
• DTwo managed hosts of different types, one of which must be converted to a secondary appliance

• A
  14% (5)
• B
  72% (26)
• C
  6% (2)
• D
  8% (3)

Explanation

Option B is correct because a High Availability cluster requires exactly one primary appliance (which can be any supported type) paired with a dedicated secondary appliance of the same type - the secondary exists solely to monitor the primary and take over if it fails. Option A is wrong because two managed hosts (e.g., Event Collectors) are worker/data-collection nodes, not HA failover pairs - pairing two of them doesn't create an HA cluster. Option C is wrong because a console is a management interface, not a primary appliance in an HA context, and the architecture described doesn't match the required primary/secondary relationship. Option D is wrong because the two hosts must be of the same type to provide equivalent failover capability; mismatched types can't substitute for each other during a failure.

Memory tip: Think "HA = Primary + Its Twin." The secondary must be a dedicated mirror of the primary - same type, doing nothing else - ready to step in instantly. If either node has another job or they're different types, true HA failover isn't possible.

No community discussion yet for this question.