A company is evaluating Nutanix Disaster Recovery (DR) to protect multiple business-critical applications. Some applications are built using a 3-tier architecture and have interdependencies.
After failover, the VM's static IP address is retained, but DNS configuration is lost.
How should an administrator proceed to resolve this issue?
During failover in Nutanix Disaster Recovery, VMs retain their static IPs but may lose DNS settings if the network configuration at the DR site is different from the primary site.
Option B (Create custom in-guest scripts) is correct:
Custom scripts allow Windows or Linux VMs to restore DNS settings automatically after failover.
These scripts can be executed using post-failover automation in Nutanix DR policies.
Option A (Self-Service Restore) is incorrect:
Self-Service Restore is used for end-user recovery of deleted files, not for network settings.
Option C (nncli tool) is incorrect:
The nncli tool is used for network troubleshooting, but it does not automatically restore DNS settings.
Option D (Configure a Protection Domain) is incorrect:
Protection Domains define replication policies, but they do not fix DNS settings after failover.
Nutanix Disaster Recovery Guide Failover Automation and Network Configuration
Nutanix Bible VM Recovery and IP Management in DR Scenarios
Nutanix KB Preserving DNS Settings in Disaster Recovery
An administrator needs to create a single chart showing multiple storage bandwidth metrics a VM is consuming.
Which type of chart should the administrator create?
Entity Charts in Nutanix Prism Central allow multiple metrics from a single entity (e.g., VM, storage container) to be displayed on a single graph.
Option B (Entity Chart) is correct:
This allows the administrator to track multiple performance metrics (e.g., read/write bandwidth, IOPS) for a specific VM.
Option A (Metric Chart) is incorrect:
Metric Charts track a single metric across multiple entities, which does not meet the requirement of displaying multiple metrics for a single VM.
Option C (Hypervisor Performance Chart) is incorrect:
Hypervisor Performance Charts track host-level metrics, not VM-specific bandwidth metrics.
Option D (VM Summary Chart) is incorrect:
VM Summary Charts only provide an overview and do not support custom multi-metric tracking.
Nutanix Prism Central Guide Entity vs. Metric Charts for Performance Analysis
Nutanix KB Creating Custom Charts in Prism Central
The customer expects to maintain a cluster runway of 9 months. The customer doesn't have a budget for 6 months but they want to add new workloads to the existing cluster.
Based on the exhibit, what is required to meet the customer's budgetary timeframe?
The exhibit shows that the overall runway is only 66 days, meaning that the current cluster does not have enough capacity to sustain workloads for 6 months, let alone 9 months.
The best solution is to add resources to the cluster (Option A), such as CPU, memory, or storage, to extend the runway.
Postponing new workloads (Option B) may help in the short term but does not align with the business need to continue adding workloads.
Deleting workloads (Option C) is not a viable option because the customer wants to add more, not remove them.
Changing the target to 9 months (Option D) does not change the actual resource constraints; it only alters the target timeframe.
Nutanix Prism Central Capacity Planning and Runway Analysis
Nutanix Bible Cluster Resource Management and Scaling
Nutanix Support KB How to Extend Cluster Runway with Resource Scaling
Which predefined view in Prism Central's Intelligent Operations should be used to determine which VM is consuming excessive resources and causing performance issues for others?
The Bully VMs List (Option C) in Prism Central's Intelligent Operations identifies VMs consuming excessive CPU, memory, or storage, which negatively affects other VMs.
Option A (Inactive VMs List) is used for identifying unused VMs but does not detect performance issues.
Option B (Overprovisioned VMs List) helps identify VMs with excessive allocated resources, but it does not focus on live performance impact.
Option D (Constrained VMs List) highlights VMs suffering from resource contention, not those causing it.
Nutanix Prism Central Intelligent Operations and Performance Tuning
Nutanix KB Identifying and Managing Resource-Hogging VMs
An administrator has configured AHV Metro Availability with Witness and is testing failover scenarios.
During testing, the administrator disconnects the primary and recovery clusters but Prism Central remains connected to the recovery site.
What are two expected system behaviors? (Choose two.)
When connectivity between Metro clusters is lost, Nutanix Metro Availability ensures data integrity using Witness for automatic failover.
Option A (Guest VM I/O operations pause until connectivity is restored) is correct:
Metro Availability enforces data consistency, so I/O operations pause until failover is confirmed.
Option C (Guest VMs failover automatically to the recovery cluster) is correct:
The Witness VM detects the failure and initiates an automatic failover to the secondary cluster.
Option B is incorrect:
Prism Central does not control VM failover in Metro Availability.
Option D is incorrect:
The primary cluster is unreachable, so VMs cannot continue running there.
Nutanix Metro Availability Guide How Witness Handles Failover Scenarios
Nutanix KB I/O Freezing and Failover Behavior in Metro Clusters
Curt
3 days agoMargo
6 days agoHui
1 months agoThomasena
2 months agoLeslie
2 months agoSolange
2 months agoKeneth
3 months agoDulce
3 months agoAntonio
3 months ago