Question 560
During a shared-cluster operating review at a university HPC center, engineers report the following issue: A support engineer is asked to distinguish host OS service failure from chassis power loss. The affected work supports research training and scheduled compute allocations; fair resource access and repeatable cluster operations matter. Which TWO responses form the best remediation-and-evidence pair? (Select TWO.)
Explanation
Correct Answers
Correct corrective action. Use a secured baseboard management controller and out-of-band path to inspect system sensors, power and remote console status independently of the host operating system. This fits the specific reported issue: A support engineer is asked to distinguish host OS service failure from chassis power loss. The corresponding failure being reduced is: Relying only on the workload OS for management can prevent diagnosis or recovery when a node crashes or its production network fails.
Correct independent evidence. An authorized operator retrieves board-level health and remote console information over the protected management network while the host OS is unavailable. This verifies the corrective approach for the affected research training and scheduled compute allocations instead of treating an architecture diagram alone as success.
Incorrect Answers
Not the most direct the action-and-evidence pair for these facts. An authorized VM sees the expected supported accelerator profile and passes workload and isolation tests under simultaneous tenant demand. This choice concerns virtual gpus and gpu sharing approaches and may be valid in another design. But this case reports 'A support engineer is asked to distinguish host OS service failure from chassis power loss', which calls for reasoning about bmc and out-of-band server health administration. The targeted response is: Use a secured baseboard management controller and out-of-band path to inspect system sensors, power and remote console status independently of the host operating system.
Not the most direct the action-and-evidence pair for these facts. Place tightly coupled distributed training processes with awareness of accelerator counts, network topology and collective communication demands, and validate gang-scheduling needs. This choice concerns distributed job placement and topology-aware orchestration and may be valid in another design. But this case reports 'A support engineer is asked to distinguish host OS service failure from chassis power loss', which calls for reasoning about bmc and out-of-band server health administration. The targeted response is: Use a secured baseboard management controller and out-of-band path to inspect system sensors, power and remote console status independently of the host operating system.
Not the most direct the action-and-evidence pair for these facts. Use NVIDIA Data Center GPU Manager to collect supported accelerator telemetry, health and diagnostic information across datacenter GPU nodes. This choice concerns nvidia dcgm gpu fleet diagnostics and health and may be valid in another design. But this case reports 'A support engineer is asked to distinguish host OS service failure from chassis power loss', which calls for reasoning about bmc and out-of-band server health administration. The targeted response is: Use a secured baseboard management controller and out-of-band path to inspect system sensors, power and remote console status independently of the host operating system.