Knowledge Check - Compute and Elasticity
Test your understanding of the key concepts from Module 4. Select the best answer for each question, then submit to see your results. You need to score at least 60% to pass.
An architect expects VM Auto Scaling to handle a growing single-VM workload by adding CPU and RAM to the running replicas as load increases. Why is this the wrong mental model of the service?
VM Auto Scaling is horizontal: it launches and terminates whole replicas to match a single metric policy, and replica-configuration changes affect only new replicas, never the running fleet. Growing one VM's CPU and RAM is Live Vertical Scaling, a separate mechanism with its own ceilings (the 240 GB RAM hotplug limit, restart-bearing CPU/RAM downscale). The distractors invent partial-resize behaviours the service does not have.
An architect is choosing a compute class for a workload that fits neatly into a fixed bundle of vCPU, RAM, and NVMe, but whose persistent business data must survive instance rebuilds. A teammate argues a Cube is unsuitable because "Cubes cannot use Block Storage." How should the architect respond?
A Cube ships with a mandatory, immutable NVMe template but can also attach add-on HDD/SSD Block Storage devices, so persistent data belongs on those volumes rather than on the NVMe disk that is deleted with the instance. The real constraint is that the template (vCPU, RAM, NVMe) is fixed after provisioning, not that the Cube cannot use Block Storage, so the correct design uses add-on volumes for data that must survive.
FinCorp needs to place a single-VM database boot-and-data disk on Block Storage and wants the volume to deliver its full rated SSD performance. Which design decision most directly governs whether the SSD will perform as expected?
SSD performance on IONOS Block Storage scales with the volume size, and IONOS recommends at least 100 GB to reach full performance, which is exactly why sub-100 GB SSDs are discouraged for database workloads. The distractors invert the HDD/SSD size relationship (HDD is size-independent), misuse availability zones, and invoke a managed cross-region replication that does not exist for Block Storage.
An architect is tuning a VM Auto Scaling group whose replicas take several minutes to boot and warm up. In testing, the group repeatedly scales out, then immediately scales back in, oscillating under steady load. Which configuration choice best stabilises the group?
Oscillation is prevented by the two anti-flapping controls: a cooldown long enough for new replicas to warm up and take load, and a mandatory separation between the scale-in and scale-out thresholds that creates a dead band. A shorter cooldown worsens over-scaling, a group may have only one metric policy, and there is no scale-to-zero because the floor is one replica.
FinCorp must run its large existing VMware estate under strict EU sovereignty while shifting the platform lifecycle off its own teams, and it also wants new elastic workloads at the edge. Which approach best fits these constraints?
A dedicated VMware Private Cloud lets FinCorp keep its VMware operating model while IONOS owns the platform lifecycle, and because the control plane is EU-operated it preserves sovereignty, where a US-operated VMware service in an EU region would still carry CLOUD Act exposure regardless of data location. The hybrid pattern places the regulated estate on dedicated VMware and the elastic new workloads on standard compute, rather than forcing a costly full re-platform or staying entirely on-premises.