Which two conditions explain this behavior?

A host failure occurs in vSphere HA cluster, but virtual machines from the failed host are not restarted on the surviving nodes in the cluster.
Which two conditions explain this behavior? (Choose two)

A.
HA has been configured to use a dedicated failure host, and the failed host is designated failover host.

B.
An anti-affinity rule configured and restarting the VMs would place them on the same host.

C.
The virtual machines on the failed host are HA disabled.

D.
Host Monitoring is disabled

Explanation:

Lets go deeper:
A. No VMs should be running on a Failover HOST < Hmmm does this mean if you did and it failed would i still restart? Like to know…
B. No, actually I was wrong before "WORST-CASE" it will restart them on a host with Anti-Affinity rules… IT WILL because ultimately HA says "YOU HAVE TO START, SORRY DRS"
C. Yes, this is in fact correct… duh.
D. See below

Please NOTE: Some dumps show
D: HOT monitoring disabled (This option will be wrong if you check it but I think it may NOT be a typo… I think VMware would actually try and trick you)

Prior: B and D
After: C and D Because B makes no sense H/A does not account for DRS rules. You can disable HA at the VM level.

2 Comments on “Which two conditions explain this behavior?

  1. sweetmail says:

    D is wrong — The question said “A host failure occurs in vSphere HA cluster”, that means the “Host Monitoring is enable”

    The answer is B & C

  2. bdowns83 says:

    D is correct.
    “When Host Monitoring is disabled, hosts are still monitored and if a host fails, the event is reported. The difference is that no action is taken.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *