A customer is considering deploying a VDC federation across two locations and a long retention policy according to data compliance needs. What are two recommendations that a technology architect…

Question

Options

• AUse five nodes for the cold archive storage pool.
• BUse eight nodes for the cold archive storage pool.
• CConfigure storage pools in both sites for cold archive.
• DConfigure two storage pools in both sites, one for active archive and another for cold archive.

• A
  12% (6)
• B
  59% (29)
• D
  29% (14)

Explanation

For a VDC federation spanning two locations with a long-retention compliance policy, eight nodes are the architectural minimum for a cold archive storage pool - the erasure coding scheme that cold archive relies on cannot be satisfied with fewer nodes, making five nodes (A) insufficient and non-functional. Configuring storage pools in both sites (C) is equally critical because a two-location federation requires cold archive capacity at each site to ensure data availability, geographic redundancy, and continuous compliance coverage if one site becomes unreachable.

Option A is wrong simply because five nodes falls below the eight-node minimum for cold archive - the pool would not operate correctly. Option D is a distractor: introducing a separate active archive pool in both sites adds unnecessary complexity that the stated requirements don't call for; the scenario only specifies long-retention cold archive needs, not a dual-tier active/cold architecture.

Memory tip: "8 nodes = cold archive works; both sites = compliance holds." Think of cold archive as needing a full "octet" (8) to function, and remember that a federation implies multiple sites - so storage must mirror the federation's geography.

No community discussion yet for this question.