An administrator removes a volume from an existing volume group which is part of replication. The system generates an error stating that it cannot create a replication session for the volume. Why…

Question

Options

• AThe volume is not mapped to the volume group host
• BThe volume group configuration must be synchronized
• CThe volume group alerts must be acknowledged
• DThe volume already has a protection policy

• A
  4% (2)
• B
  10% (5)
• C
  8% (4)
• D
  78% (40)

Explanation

Option D is correct because when a volume already has a protection policy applied (such as a replication rule), it carries its own independent replication configuration - removing it from a volume group doesn't strip that policy, so the system cannot create a new, separate replication session for it without a conflict. The storage system raises an error because two replication definitions cannot coexist on the same volume simultaneously.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A is wrong because host mapping is irrelevant to whether replication can be configured; a volume can be replicated regardless of its mapping state.
• B is wrong because volume group synchronization is a status concern, not a blocker for creating a replication session on an individual volume.
• C is wrong because unacknowledged alerts don't prevent replication session creation; alert acknowledgment is an operational/monitoring function, not a replication prerequisite.

Memory tip: Think of a protection policy as a "lock" on the volume - a volume can only wear one replication lock at a time, so trying to add another session while the lock is still attached will always fail. If you see a replication error after restructuring a volume group, check for an existing policy first.

No community discussion yet for this question.