The Splunk Validated Architectures (SVAs) document provides a series of approved Splunk topologies. Which statement accurately describes how it should be used by a customer?

Question

Options

• ACustomer should look at the category tables, pick the highest number that their budget permits,
• BCustomers should identify their requirements, provisionally choose an approved design that meets
• CUsing the guided requirements gathering in the SVAs document, choose a topology that suits
• DChoose an SVA topology code that includes Search Head and Indexer Clustering because it offers

• A
  4% (1)
• B
  89% (25)
• C
  7% (2)

Explanation

Option B is correct because the SVA document is designed as a reference guide, not a prescriptive checklist - customers are expected to first analyze their own requirements (data volume, user count, availability needs), then map those requirements to the closest matching approved topology, and validate the fit before committing. This requirements-first approach ensures the chosen architecture is appropriately sized and supported.

Why the distractors fail:

• A is wrong because SVAs are not tiered by budget - picking "the highest number budget permits" ignores whether that topology actually fits your technical requirements.
• C is wrong because the SVA document does not contain a built-in guided requirements-gathering wizard; that discovery work happens outside the document, before consulting it.
• D is wrong because Search Head and Indexer Clustering are not universally the right choice - smaller or simpler deployments may not need clustering, and choosing topology features before knowing your requirements is backwards.

Memory tip: Think of SVAs like building codes - you first figure out what you need to build (requirements), then find the approved blueprint that matches (SVA topology), not the other way around. Requirements → SVA, never SVA → Requirements.

No community discussion yet for this question.