Your network contains three servers named HV1, HV2, and Server1 that run Windows
Server 2012 R2. HV1 and HV2 have the Hyper-V server role installed. Server1 is a file
server that contains 3 TB of free disk space.
HV1 hosts a virtual machine named VM1. The virtual machine configuration file for VM1 is
stored in D:\VM and the virtual hard disk file is stored in E:\VHD.
You plan to replace drive E with a larger volume.
You need to ensure that VM1 remains available from HV1 while drive E is being replaced.
You want to achieve this goal by using the minimum amount of administrative effort.
What should you do?
A.
Perform a live migration to HV2.
B.
Add HV1 and HV2 as nodes in a failover cluster. Perform a storage migration to HV2.
C.
Add HV1 and HV2 as nodes in a failover cluster. Perform a live migration to HV2.
D.
Perform a storage migration to Server1.
I guess B is correct. D is wrong because Hyper-V must be installed. See:
https://www.simple-talk.com/sysadmin/virtualization/hyper-v-migration-technologies/
Check Chapter “Quick Storage migration”:
“QSM across hosts and clusters can be used to migrate virtual machine Storage between two Hyper-V Hosts there are not in the same cluster and between nodes of a Hyper-V Cluster”
It’s nothing said about migrating to a target Server without Hyper-V installed.
Hyper-V is already installed on HV1.So D is the correct answer.
yah.HYPER – V Should be installed in server 1.it does not mention anything about it.
So answer should “B”
D is correct – the new storage location can be anywhere, it doesnt have to be a hyper-v host e.g \\server1\VHDFiles\ as per http://blogs.technet.com/b/canitpro/archive/2013/03/21/step-by-step-completing-storage-live-migration-in-hyper-v.aspx
Yes… but it does say it’s moving to a server called “HyperV”, which would imply it has the HyperV roles installed.
Anyone want to physically test this?
does not matter he used the name scheme to identify the data you can call it whatever you want..
I have done this numerous times it does not require a hyper role to be installed for migration so the answer posted is D correct.
‘Using a minimum amount of adminitrative effort’ is the always key for this type of questions.
They will give multiple possible solutions, but with that key in mind, D is the answer.
A,C is not the answer because VM1 has to remain in HV1
B is possible, but it takes lots of effort to set up cluster.
D seems the best answer. You just do storage migration lively to another server, then bring back when large disk is insert to hot swap bay.
hi
in my clustered environment I have made storage MOVES to different server, even a application server once, as long as its reachable through network path, you can move storage, the VM still runs on the HyperV as intended, it is just the location where the VHDx and config reside thats different till the disk is replaced adn moved back.
Must be B.
VM must should remain available from HV1.
Create cluster and move the VM files to HV2 (Storage migration) and VM remains available from HV1.
All other answers would have VM run from different Hyper-V host.
Yes, but it’s not the least administrative effort. So, you’re wrong.
Live migration would be great, but the question doesn’t state that the Hyper-V hosts are clustered. And it would run off a different host then too.
The storage migration is fine, the guest would still be running from HV1, only the storage is elsewhere.
After rethinking this one.
D is still a good option as you need to migrate to shared storage.
Server 1 is a file server, with most likely shared storage…
“HV1 and HV2 have the Hyper-V server role installed”
Hyper-V already installed.
so D…
I agree with D, as people have said you don’t need to have the hyper-v role installed to store the VHD there.
Guys, guys,
D is the answer. End of story!
*just take my word for it*
Initially, I found the question is confusing. After having re-thought, it should be D because the storage of VHD is on Server1 but VM1 is still being hosted on HV1 which is the question’s requirement. I think the question is testing this concept. Correct me if I am wrong.
Very confusing question, just fyi it’s possible to execute a live migration including the storage migration ,but in that case is called cluesterless live migration, which is not listed here.
I would go with A
Tricky one.
I go with D because the requires is “You need to ensure that VM1 remains available from HV1 while drive E is being replaced.” it means not from HV2.
D is only one which you can reach VM1 from HV1.
“Server1 is a file server that contains 3 TB of free disk space. You plan to replace drive E with a larger volume.” Implies that you are migrating storage to Server1. So D is correct.
let understand some concepts here:
first B and C are not the least effort as because u need to create a New Failover Cluter WOW to much work.
option D to perform a storage migration u need the destination to have a hyper V machine which is not the case cause in the question Server1 is only a file server
option A is the correct answer. HERE is the KEY in windows server 2012R2 u can perform live migrations of the VM AND/OR its storage by selecting the MOVE buttom on the Virtual Machine u dont need a cluster to do that. When u select the move buttom u will be presented with 2 options:
– move the virtual machine
– move the virtual machine storage
Select the second one and as i said to move the virtual machine storage u must have a HyperV on the destination i know that because there is some delegation prerequisites u must do on the destination HyperV machine which i will not cover here.
So Answer is A
totally agree
You make a fair point, however they state that VM1 should remain running on HV1. If you live migrate it to HV2 then it will no longer comply with the request.
Also, storage migration is possible outside of HyperV. I just tested it it my lab and I was able to migrate the storage of my VM to a shared folder on another computer that did not have the HV role installed.
There are two major key sentence here. First one is:
“You need to ensure that VM1 remains available from HV1 while drive E is being replaced.”
So any solution suggesting a live migration to HV2 does not comply to the requirement (Answers A, C)
Second key sentence is:
“You want to achieve this goal by using the minimum amount of administrative effort.”
Creating a Cluster and performing a storage migration is not the minimum amount of effort. (Answer B)
Having this in mind, there is only one choice left:
Answer D: Perform a storage migration to Server1.
(which is technically possible, i failed in my lab due to a access denied error in a workgroup environment)
D is correct!
Live migration —this type of migration moves a virtual machine running as part of a failover cluster from one cluster to another with no noticeable downtime for users or network applications. Live migration requires two or more servers that run Hyper-V, that support hardware virtualization, and use processors from the same manufacturer, such as all AMD processors or all Intel processors, for example.
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj628158(v=sc.12).aspx
Storage Migration – In Windows Server 2012, you can leave the VM running and let the system move the files and perform configuration changes without taking the VM out offline..! Think how useful this will be for scenarios such as a volume that is either running out of space, or is over utilized. Provided that you have another volume that has spare capacity, you can move your VMs files on-the-fly to load balance or optimize capacity utilization.
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/clustering/2012/04/26/windows-server-2012-storage-migration-for-cluster-managed-virtual-machines/