VMware 3V0-23.25 問題集 練習問題・模擬試験｜日本語版＆英語版対応

サンプル問題 1： An Infrastructure Manager is evaluating the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) and operational trade-offs of expanding a traditional 3-tier SAN environment versus migrating to vSAN HCI for a 20-host VCF Workload Domain. The database administrators argue for keeping the 3-tier SAN, citing "independent scaling." The VCF architects argue for HCI, citing "operational simplicity." [TCO & Operations Profile] Existing SAN: Dual Controller Array (Currently at 95% IOPS capacity, 40% disk capacity). Proposed HCI: 20x vSAN ESA ReadyNodes. Which of the following statements correctly evaluate the trade-offs and limitations of the 3-tier SAN architecture in this specific growth scenario? (Select all that apply.)

• A: To fix the SAN IOPS bottleneck, the manager must purchase expensive new array controllers, incurring a massive upfront CapEx hit known as the "Forklift Upgrade."
• B: The 3-tier SAN maintains a genuine architectural advantage by allowing the manager to add pure storage capacity (JBODs) without paying for additional ESXi CPU/RAM licenses.
• C: HCI inherently consumes 30% of the physical network bandwidth just to maintain 3-tier legacy compatibility with Fibre Channel storage arrays.
• D: The existing SAN exhibits the "stranded capacity" limitation; it has plenty of free disk space (60%), but cannot use it for high-IOPS workloads because the controllers are saturated.
• E: Expanding HCI node-by-node allows granular OpEx spending (paying only for the CPU/Storage needed today), whereas SANs require predicting and purchasing 5-years of controller headroom upfront.

サンプル問題 2： An Infrastructure Manager is sizing the network requirements for a vSAN ESA Remote Protection strategy. The organization wants to protect 50 TB of production data with a 15-minute RPO to a secondary site. The manager evaluates the backend network impact during the initial seed and subsequent incremental replications. [vSAN Performance View - Inter-Site Link (ISL)] Outbound Replication Traffic Peak Bandwidth: 18 Gbps Average Bandwidth: 1.2 Gbps Congestion: 5 Inbound Client I/O Traffic Latency: 25ms (Elevated) Which of the following factors correctly evaluate the trade-offs and operational constraints of sizing network bandwidth for Remote Protection? (Select all that apply.)

• A: The manager should deploy the vSphere Replication appliance to compress the traffic, as native vSAN Remote Protection cannot compress replication streams.
• B: The initial full sync (baseline) will consume significant bandwidth (up to 18 Gbps shown) and must be throttled to prevent starving active VM I/O on the network.
• C: Reducing the RPO from 60 minutes to 15 minutes decreases the peak bandwidth required for each sync, as fewer delta blocks accumulate between intervals.
• D: vSAN ESA Remote Protection uses deduplication during transit, meaning the 50 TB of data will only consume roughly 10 TB of network bandwidth for the initial seed.
• E: Network congestion caused by high replication traffic directly increases the "Inbound Client I/O Traffic" latency because vSAN shares the same VMkernel adapter for both storage I/O and replication.

サンプル問題 3： An L3 Support Engineer is configuring a VCF 9.0 vSAN Stretched Cluster. The cluster includes two sites (Preferred and Secondary). The goal is to ensure Tier-1 database VMs strictly run on the Preferred Site during normal operations, but gracefully failover to the Secondary Site if the Preferred Site burns down. The engineer uses Ruby vSphere Console (RVC) to check cluster state while configuring vSphere DRS. [RVC Output: vsan.stretchedcluster_config] Preferred Site: esx-01, esx-02, esx-03 Secondary Site: esx-04, esx-05, esx-06 Which TWO configurations MUST the engineer apply to the DRS Host/VM Groups to satisfy this DR requirement? (Choose 2.)

• A: The engineer must disable DRS Automation (set to Manual) to prevent VMs from accidentally moving to the Secondary site during daytime high CPU loads.
• B: The engineer must map the DRS VM groups directly to the vSAN Unicast Agent tables via CL
• C: The engineer must apply a "SHOULD run on hosts in group" DRS rule; this keeps the VMs on the Preferred site normally, but allows vSphere HA to violate the rule and restart them on the Secondary site during a total site failure.
• D: The engineer must apply a "MUST run on hosts in group" DRS rule for the VMs; "MUST" ensures that HA can strictly map the IPs during failover.
• E: The engineer must create a DRS "Host Group" containing ONLY the Preferred Site hosts (esx-01 through esx-03).