A capacity-oriented VM disk must use a storage policy on a Nutanix cluster. Write activity is moderate, and the cluster has limited spare capacity for rebuilds. Which storage policy setting best balances usable capacity with write and rebuild behavior?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Think of erasure coding like trading raw space for math: it stretches capacity, but parity work can slow writes and rebuilds. If your disks are capacity-focused and writes are only moderate, a narrower stripe with enough parity gives protection without pulling too many nodes into recovery.
Full Explanation
Erasure coding stores data across multiple nodes using parity, increasing usable capacity compared with full replication while still tolerating node failures. For capacity-oriented workloads with moderate writes, it can be appropriate, but administrators must consider that parity calculations add write overhead and rebuilds can involve multiple nodes. A narrower stripe with sufficient parity limits the number of nodes participating in reconstruction and keeps the write penalty manageable while still protecting against failures. Using a wide stripe with only one parity block may maximize capacity but increases rebuild fan-out and can expose the volume to insufficient protection if more than one failure occurs during reconstruction. Relying only on replication factor 2 preserves simpler write and rebuild behavior but consumes more raw capacity, which conflicts with the capacity-oriented goal. Using the widest stripe with minimum parity minimizes space but maximizes rebuild scope and write amplification, making it risky when spare capacity is constrained. Exam caveat: choose erasure coding when capacity savings outweigh the write and rebuild cost, not merely because the option exists. Operational check: review the storage policy settings against current cluster utilization, node count, and expected write rate before applying the policy to a production disk.