Practice Free HPE0-S59 Exam Online Questions
A system administrator just resolved a server crash that was traced to an outdated SmartPqi.sys driver, which was incompatible with a recently updated Smart Array firmware.
To prevent this *specific type* of issue from reoccurring, what is the best preventative measure?
- A . Set all iLO security settings to "High Security" to block unauthorized driver updates.
- B . Disable the Smart Array write cache.
- C . Always update the firmware and drivers separately, at least one week apart.
- D . Use the validated Service Pack for ProLiant (SPP) to update all components as a single baseline.
A system administrator just resolved a server crash that was traced to an outdated SmartPqi.sys driver, which was incompatible with a recently updated Smart Array firmware.
To prevent this *specific type* of issue from reoccurring, what is the best preventative measure?
- A . Set all iLO security settings to "High Security" to block unauthorized driver updates.
- B . Disable the Smart Array write cache.
- C . Always update the firmware and drivers separately, at least one week apart.
- D . Use the validated Service Pack for ProLiant (SPP) to update all components as a single baseline.
Validation: Monitor network traffic for 1 hour.
The administrator needs to evaluate the potential effects and results of this action plan *before* it is implemented. The physical switch to which the server is connected has *not* been configured for Link Aggregation (LACP or static LAG).
Question 4 of 6 What is the correct, long-term action plan to achieve true, dynamic load balancing and failover for all VMs across both 25Gb ports? (Choose 2.)
- A . Configure "Route based on IP hash" on the ESXi vSwitch.
- B . Configure LACP (802.3ad) on the two physical switch ports connected to the server.
- C . Replace the 2-port adapter with a 4-port adapter.
- D . Manually assign half the VMs to Uplink 1 and half to Uplink 2.
- E . Upgrade the vSwitch to a Distributed vSwitch and enable Network I/O Control (NIOC).
A, B
Explanation:
– A. Correct. To achieve true load balancing where traffic is distributed based on VM IP addresses, the "Route based on IP hash" policy *must* be selected on the vSwitch.
– B. Correct. "Route based on IP hash" will not work (and will cause an outage, as seen in Q1) *unless* the corresponding physical switch ports are bundled into a Link Aggregation Group (LAG), typically using LACP. The combination of (A) and (B) is the correct plan.
– C. Incorrect. Adding more ports does not solve the load balancing policy issue. The same saturation problem would just happen on one of the 4 ports.
– D. Incorrect. This is a static, manual workaround, not a "true, dynamic" long-term solution.
– E. Incorrect. A Distributed vSwitch and NIOC provide centralized management and bandwidth *guarantees*, but "Route based on IP hash" with LACP is the specific feature set that provides dynamic load balancing across the physical uplinks.
Knowledge Point: Troubleshoot HPE Server Solutions
Associated Topics (Primary): Identify appropriate measures to limit reoccurrences of resolved issues
Question_Type: MultipleChoice
Keywords: action plan | load balancing | LACP | IP hash | vSwitch | dynamic
Persona: Network Administrator
Persona_Modifier: troubleshooting a critical performance issue
Target_Component: HPE FlexibleLOM
Data_Format_Used: Scenario-TextDescription
Assessment_Focus: ScenarioAnalysis-SolutionDesign
Validation: Monitor network traffic for 1 hour.
The administrator needs to evaluate the potential effects and results of this action plan *before* it is implemented. The physical switch to which the server is connected has *not* been configured for Link Aggregation (LACP or static LAG).
Question 4 of 6 What is the correct, long-term action plan to achieve true, dynamic load balancing and failover for all VMs across both 25Gb ports? (Choose 2.)
- A . Configure "Route based on IP hash" on the ESXi vSwitch.
- B . Configure LACP (802.3ad) on the two physical switch ports connected to the server.
- C . Replace the 2-port adapter with a 4-port adapter.
- D . Manually assign half the VMs to Uplink 1 and half to Uplink 2.
- E . Upgrade the vSwitch to a Distributed vSwitch and enable Network I/O Control (NIOC).
A, B
Explanation:
– A. Correct. To achieve true load balancing where traffic is distributed based on VM IP addresses, the "Route based on IP hash" policy *must* be selected on the vSwitch.
– B. Correct. "Route based on IP hash" will not work (and will cause an outage, as seen in Q1) *unless* the corresponding physical switch ports are bundled into a Link Aggregation Group (LAG), typically using LACP. The combination of (A) and (B) is the correct plan.
– C. Incorrect. Adding more ports does not solve the load balancing policy issue. The same saturation problem would just happen on one of the 4 ports.
– D. Incorrect. This is a static, manual workaround, not a "true, dynamic" long-term solution.
– E. Incorrect. A Distributed vSwitch and NIOC provide centralized management and bandwidth *guarantees*, but "Route based on IP hash" with LACP is the specific feature set that provides dynamic load balancing across the physical uplinks.
Knowledge Point: Troubleshoot HPE Server Solutions
Associated Topics (Primary): Identify appropriate measures to limit reoccurrences of resolved issues
Question_Type: MultipleChoice
Keywords: action plan | load balancing | LACP | IP hash | vSwitch | dynamic
Persona: Network Administrator
Persona_Modifier: troubleshooting a critical performance issue
Target_Component: HPE FlexibleLOM
Data_Format_Used: Scenario-TextDescription
Assessment_Focus: ScenarioAnalysis-SolutionDesign
An Implementation Specialist is at a customer site to install a new HPE ProLiant server. The server must be configured with specific BIOS/UEFI settings for virtualization (VT-d, SR-IOV) and a secure boot policy.
What are the valid methods to apply these advanced configuration settings *before* the operating system is installed? (Choose 2.)
- A . Use the HPE Smart Update Manager (SUM) to deploy a BIOS configuration file.
- B . Access the System Utilities (F9) during POST and configure the settings manually.
- C . Connect to the server’s iLO and use the "BIOS/UEFI" configuration page.
- D . Use the "hponcfg" utility from a Windows PE boot disk.
- E . Boot to Intelligent Provisioning (F10) and use the "System Configuration" option.
A Storage Administrator is remotely troubleshooting a server that will not boot. The iLO Health Summary page is red, and the "Memory" subsystem is marked as "Failed."
What is the *first* tool the administrator should use in iLO to find the *exact* DIMM slot that has failed?
- A . System Information > Memory page
- B . Active Health System (AHS) Log
- C . iLO Remote Console
- D . Integrated Management Log (IML)
A Storage Administrator is planning a critical firmware update on an HPE ProLiant DL380 Gen10 server. The server runs Windows Server 2019 and hosts a high-transaction database on a logical drive managed by an HPE Smart Array P408i-a controller.
Current State:
– Server: HPE ProLiant DL380 Gen10
– Controller: HPE Smart Array P408i-a
– Controller Firmware: 3.10
– OS Driver: `SmartPqi.sys` version 1.2.3.4
– OS: Windows Server 2019
– Issue: The database team is reporting intermittent high latency.
– Proposed Action: The administrator plans to update *only* the Smart Array P408i-a controller firmware from 3.10 to the latest version, 4.20, during a maintenance window to address potential bugs.
The administrator needs to identify all potential impacts of this change *before* proceeding.
Question 1 of 6 What is the most critical compatibility check the administrator *must* perform before applying the 4.20 firmware?
- A . Verify that the 4.20 firmware is compatible with the server’s iLO 5 firmware version.
- B . Verify that the Windows Server 2019 `SmartPqi.sys` OS driver (version 1.2.3.4) is compatible with the new 4.20 firmware.
- C . Verify that the server’s power supplies can support the 4.20 firmware’s power requirements.
- D . Verify that the 4.20 firmware supports the currently installed SAS drives.
B
Explanation:
– B. Correct. Smart Array controller firmware and its corresponding OS driver are developed and tested as a pair. A significant jump in firmware (3.10 to 4.20) will almost certainly require a new, compatible OS driver. If the administrator only updates the firmware, the existing 1.2.3.4 driver will likely be incompatible, leading to performance issues, data corruption, or a "Blue Screen of Death" (BSOD).
– A. Incorrect. While iLO firmware should be kept up-to-date, there is not a direct, strict compatibility lock between iLO firmware and storage controller firmware. The OS driver is the most critical dependency.
– C. Incorrect. A controller firmware update does not change the hardware’s power requirements.
– D. Incorrect. While drive compatibility is important, it is highly unlikely that a newer firmware version for the *same controller* would drop support for previously supported drives. The driver-firmware link is the most common and critical point of failure in this scenario.
Knowledge Point: Manage, Monitor, and Maintain Solutions
Associated Topics (Primary): Given a customer scenario, identify potential impacts of a change | Using support matrices, evaluate software and firmware compatibility
Question_Type: SingleChoice
Keywords: impact of change | firmware | driver | Smart Array | compatibility | support matrix
Persona: Storage Administrator
Persona_Modifier: evaluating the impact of a proposed firmware update
Target_Component: HPE Smart Array Controller
Data_Format_Used: Scenario-TextDescription
A Storage Administrator is planning a critical firmware update on an HPE ProLiant DL380 Gen10 server. The server runs Windows Server 2019 and hosts a high-transaction database on a logical drive managed by an HPE Smart Array P408i-a controller.
Current State:
– Server: HPE ProLiant DL380 Gen10
– Controller: HPE Smart Array P408i-a
– Controller Firmware: 3.10
– OS Driver: `SmartPqi.sys` version 1.2.3.4
– OS: Windows Server 2019
– Issue: The database team is reporting intermittent high latency.
– Proposed Action: The administrator plans to update *only* the Smart Array P408i-a controller firmware from 3.10 to the latest version, 4.20, during a maintenance window to address potential bugs.
The administrator needs to identify all potential impacts of this change *before* proceeding.
Question 1 of 6 What is the most critical compatibility check the administrator *must* perform before applying the 4.20 firmware?
- A . Verify that the 4.20 firmware is compatible with the server’s iLO 5 firmware version.
- B . Verify that the Windows Server 2019 `SmartPqi.sys` OS driver (version 1.2.3.4) is compatible with the new 4.20 firmware.
- C . Verify that the server’s power supplies can support the 4.20 firmware’s power requirements.
- D . Verify that the 4.20 firmware supports the currently installed SAS drives.
B
Explanation:
– B. Correct. Smart Array controller firmware and its corresponding OS driver are developed and tested as a pair. A significant jump in firmware (3.10 to 4.20) will almost certainly require a new, compatible OS driver. If the administrator only updates the firmware, the existing 1.2.3.4 driver will likely be incompatible, leading to performance issues, data corruption, or a "Blue Screen of Death" (BSOD).
– A. Incorrect. While iLO firmware should be kept up-to-date, there is not a direct, strict compatibility lock between iLO firmware and storage controller firmware. The OS driver is the most critical dependency.
– C. Incorrect. A controller firmware update does not change the hardware’s power requirements.
– D. Incorrect. While drive compatibility is important, it is highly unlikely that a newer firmware version for the *same controller* would drop support for previously supported drives. The driver-firmware link is the most common and critical point of failure in this scenario.
Knowledge Point: Manage, Monitor, and Maintain Solutions
Associated Topics (Primary): Given a customer scenario, identify potential impacts of a change | Using support matrices, evaluate software and firmware compatibility
Question_Type: SingleChoice
Keywords: impact of change | firmware | driver | Smart Array | compatibility | support matrix
Persona: Storage Administrator
Persona_Modifier: evaluating the impact of a proposed firmware update
Target_Component: HPE Smart Array Controller
Data_Format_Used: Scenario-TextDescription
A Storage Administrator is troubleshooting a server with an amber Health LED. The administrator logs into iLO 5 and sees the "Storage" subsystem is "Degraded."
What is the *best* tool for the administrator to use to identify the specific state of the logical drives and physical drives?
- A . Smart Storage Administrator (SSA)
- B . System Utilities (F9)
- C . The Active Health System (AHS) Log
- D . The Integrated Management Log (IML)
A Storage Administrator is troubleshooting a server with an amber Health LED. The administrator logs into iLO 5 and sees the "Storage" subsystem is "Degraded."
What is the *best* tool for the administrator to use to identify the specific state of the logical drives and physical drives?
- A . Smart Storage Administrator (SSA)
- B . System Utilities (F9)
- C . The Active Health System (AHS) Log
- D . The Integrated Management Log (IML)