Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

CompTIA Exam CV0-003 Topic 2 Question 78 Discussion

Actual exam question for CompTIA's CV0-003 exam
Question #: 78
Topic #: 2
[All CV0-003 Questions]

An integration application that communicates between different application and database servers is currently hosted on a physical machine. A P2V migration needs to be done to reduce the hardware footprint. Which of the following should be considered to maintain the same level of network throughput and latency in the virtual server?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

SR-IOV stands for Single Root I/O Virtualization, which is a technology that allows a physical network adapter to be partitioned into multiple virtual functions (VFs) that can be directly assigned to virtual machines (VMs). This way, the network traffic bypasses the software layer of the hypervisor and the virtual switch, and goes directly from the VM to the physical adapter. This reduces the CPU overhead, the network latency, and the packet loss, and improves the network throughput and scalability. SR-IOV can achieve near-native performance for network-intensive applications, such as an integration application that communicates between different application and database servers. By enabling SR-IOV capability on the physical server and the virtual server, the P2V migration can maintain the same level of network throughput and latency as the original physical machine.Reference:High performance network virtualization with SR-IOV;Supercharge Your Network Throughput via Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV);Overview of Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV).


by Chanel at Apr 10, 2024, 07:27 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CV0-003 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Audra
7 months ago
Adding more vCPU might help with processing power, but it may not directly impact network throughput and latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lorrie
7 months ago
I believe upgrading the physical server NICs to support 10Gbps could also be a good option to consider.
upvoted 0 times
...
Corazon
8 months ago
I agree with User 1. Enabling SR-IOV capability can help improve performance in the virtual server.
upvoted 0 times
...
James
8 months ago
I think we should consider enabling SR-IOV capability for maintaining network throughput and latency in the virtual server.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stanton
8 months ago
That's a good point. Upgrading NICs can definitely help maintain network throughput and reduce latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cherry
8 months ago
Would upgrading the physical server NICs to support Gwen0Gbps also be a good option for maintaining network performance?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
9 months ago
I agree. SR-IOV can help improve performance by allowing virtualization-aware drivers to bypass the hypervisor.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gwen
9 months ago
I think we should consider enabling SR-IOV capability for maintaining network throughput and latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alexis
9 months ago
Haha, Lynna, you're right. That option seems a bit out of left field. Unless the application is really memory-intensive, I don't think that's the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodrigo
9 months ago
Yo, this question is like a riddle wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a server rack! I mean, who even knows what SR-IOV is, right? I think I'm gonna go with the good old-fashioned 'more vCPUs' approach. It's like, the more cores, the better, am I right? Although, I guess we should probably check the network settings too. Maybe we can ask the IT guy to throw in a few extra ethernet cables or something?
upvoted 0 times
...
Caprice
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm not too familiar with these virtualization concepts, but I'm guessing the answer has something to do with the network setup. Increasing the VM swap/paging size seems like a weird solution, though. I mean, how's that gonna help with the network performance? I'm leaning towards the SR-IOV option, but I'm open to other suggestions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Asuncion
10 months ago
I think the key here is to maintain the same level of network throughput and latency in the virtual server. Adding more vCPUs could help, but I'm not sure if that's the most efficient solution. Maybe we should look into enabling SR-IOV capability? That could help with the network performance, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynna
10 months ago
Haha, I love how this is turning into a heated debate. Meanwhile, I'm just sitting here wondering if option D, increasing the VM swap/paging size, is even relevant in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nidia
10 months ago
Oh man, this question seems like a real head-scratcher! I'm not too sure about the right answer, but I'm guessing it has something to do with the network performance of the virtual server. Upgrading the physical server NICs seems like a good idea, but I'm not sure if that's the only thing we need to consider.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carmen
10 months ago
That's a good point, Kayleigh. I was leaning towards option B, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe a combination of upgrading the NICs and adding more vCPUs would be the best approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kayleigh
10 months ago
But wait, don't we also need to consider the CPU and memory requirements? Adding more vCPUs might be important too, especially for an integration application that's handling a lot of traffic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melita
10 months ago
Yeah, I agree. I'm thinking option C, enabling SR-IOV, might be the way to go. That should help maintain the network throughput and latency, right?
upvoted 0 times
Aleisha
8 months ago
Enabling SR-IOV capability sounds like the right solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nina
9 months ago
I think option C is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annmarie
9 months ago
D: Increasing the VM swap/paging size doesn't seem necessary for this situation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawn
9 months ago
C: I agree, SR-IOV seems like the most appropriate option for maintaining network performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodney
9 months ago
B: Adding more vCPU might help too, but I think SR-IOV is still a better choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marylyn
9 months ago
A: That's a good point. Upgrading the NICs could also improve performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Freeman
9 months ago
C: Maybe we should also consider upgrading the physical server NICs to support 10Gbps.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yun
9 months ago
B: Yeah, I agree. SR-IOV is a good option for maintaining performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Valentine
9 months ago
A: I think enabling SR-IOV would definitely help with network throughput and latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ardella
10 months ago
Hmm, this seems like a tricky question. I'm not too familiar with P2V migrations, but I can see how the network performance would be an important consideration.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel