cert
cert-1
cert-2

Pass CompTIA SK0-005 Exam in First Attempt Guaranteed!

Get 100% Latest Exam Questions, Accurate & Verified Answers to Pass the Actual Exam!
30 Days Free Updates, Instant Download!

cert-5
cert-6
SK0-005 Exam - Verified By Experts
SK0-005 Premium Bundle
$29.98

SK0-005 Premium Bundle

$79.99
$109.97
  • Premium File 617 Questions & Answers. Last update: Nov 13, 2026
  • Training Course 139 Video Lectures
  • Study Guide 533 Pages
 
$109.97
$79.99
accept 21 downloads in last 7 days
block-screenshots
Purchase CompTIA SK0-005 Exam Training Products Individually
CompTIA SK0-005 Premium File
Premium File 617 Q&A
$76.99$69.99
CompTIA SK0-005 Video Training Course
Training Course 139 Lectures
$21.99 $19.99
CompTIA SK0-005 PDF Study Guide
Study Guide 533 Pages
$21.99 $19.99
CompTIA SK0-005 Practice Test 72

Question 710

A change board is planning a verified response to this server event: A critical service fails immediately after an OS cumulative update changes a system library and breaks a vendor plugin. For the OS patch regression and rollback issue, which response elements belong in the approved plan? Select TWO answers.

  1. Disable all future security updates because one change was incompatible.
  2. Restrict management exposure, enforce MFA and rate limiting and investigate authentication events and compromised credentials.
  3. Compare changed package and driver versions, confirm a supported regression and execute an approved rollback or fixed update.
  4. Inspect change records, kernel and driver logs, known advisories and control-host comparison tests.
  5. The host boots the approved OS reliably through several cold boots with disk access intact.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

A close timeline between change and failure is a hypothesis to test, not automatic proof of cause. Before rollout, confirm the problem with: Inspect change records, kernel and driver logs, known advisories and control-host comparison tests.

D:

These observations investigate the exact OS patch regression and rollback failure rather than unrelated components. The expected technical relationship is: A close timeline between change and failure is a hypothesis to test, not automatic proof of cause.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Discriminate using: Inspect change records, kernel and driver logs, known advisories and control-host comparison tests.

B:

This statement concerns Brute-force authentication and account lockout, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported OS patch regression and rollback fault or prove its repair.

E:

This statement concerns Boot loader and failed update recovery, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported OS patch regression and rollback fault or prove its repair.

Question 711

A server administrator is investigating a server issue involving hypervisor contention causing guest latency: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes. The change must address the documented fault without creating unrelated risk. Which corrective action is most appropriate? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Double the guest vCPU count on the same saturated host without measuring ready time.
  2. Use host and guest metrics to identify hypervisor resource contention, then right-size or rebalance allocations.
  3. Compare changed package and driver versions, confirm a supported regression and execute an approved rollback or fixed update.
  4. Trace application errors, dependencies, configuration and resource metrics; restore a supported version or correct the actual limit.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Before rollout, confirm the problem with: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This is the unsafe shortcut in the Hypervisor contention causing guest latency scenario, not a justified remediation or diagnostic. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

C:

That option would compare changed package and driver versions, confirm a supported regression and execute an approved rollback or fixed update, but it addresses a different concern. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

D:

That option would trace application errors, dependencies, configuration and resource metrics; restore a supported version or correct the actual limit, but it addresses a different concern. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

Question 712

While reviewing the CompTIA Server+ administration incident, a technician learns: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes. Which principle most directly explains how to address the described issue safely? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Multipath configuration must be tested across real fabric failures and correct asymmetric access states.
  2. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.
  3. Boot failures may arise before services start; distinguish firmware/bootloader problems from application outages.
  4. Link-up alone does not establish link quality; CRC, FCS, drops and duplex mismatches reveal layer-one or layer-two faults.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The acceptance test is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts. Scenario: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This statement concerns SAN fabric multipath failover and latency, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

C:

This statement concerns Boot loader and failed update recovery, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

D:

This statement concerns NIC port errors and duplex mismatch, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

Question 713

Before a server change is approved, the on-call engineer receives this incident report: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes. Which evidence would most directly establish the stated root-cause hypothesis? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Inspect console boot errors, UEFI order, boot partition, initramfs modules and prior working entries.
  2. Double the guest vCPU count on the same saturated host without measuring ready time.
  3. Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks.
  4. Correlate stack traces, error codes, database connection metrics, package versions and deployment history.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

These observations investigate the exact Hypervisor contention causing guest latency failure rather than unrelated components. Incident: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks.

B:

Instead, the supported correction is: Use host and guest metrics to identify hypervisor resource contention, then right-size or rebalance allocations. This is the unsafe shortcut in the Hypervisor contention causing guest latency scenario, not a justified remediation or diagnostic.

D:

For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. Incident: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes.

Question 714

After the team implements a targeted remediation for Hypervisor contention causing guest latency, the original incident was: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes. Which acceptance criterion would best demonstrate a durable and safe resolution? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.
  2. The fault disappears under an approved version with no unrelated security controls disabled.
  3. A single-fabric outage causes no I/O loss and service returns to expected latency on supported paths.
  4. Service is restored within response targets, temporary risk is removed and a reproducible fix is documented.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. Incident: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This statement concerns OS patch regression and rollback, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

C:

This statement concerns SAN fabric multipath failover and latency, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair.

D:

This statement concerns Escalation, rollback and post-incident closure, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

Question 715

A change board is planning a verified response to this server event: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes. For the Hypervisor contention causing guest latency issue, which response elements belong in the approved plan? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Read RAID member status, SMART/media diagnostics, backplane events, parity consistency and backup freshness.
  2. Use host and guest metrics to identify hypervisor resource contention, then right-size or rebalance allocations. Then validate the change by confirming: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.
  3. Double the guest vCPU count on the same saturated host without measuring ready time.
  4. Restore the supported boot entry or known-good kernel and rebuild boot images as needed using tested recovery media.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This avoids the unsafe shortcut: Double the guest vCPU count on the same saturated host without measuring ready time.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This statement concerns RAID degraded state and predictive drive failure, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

C:

This is the unsafe shortcut in the Hypervisor contention causing guest latency scenario, not a justified remediation or diagnostic. Incident: A VM's guest CPU appears underutilized but its application stalls during nightly jobs because host CPU ready time spikes.

D:

This statement concerns Boot loader and failed update recovery, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair.

Question 716

A server administrator is investigating a server issue involving hypervisor contention causing guest latency: An application VM begins swapping heavily after moving to a hypervisor host oversubscribed on RAM, despite guest free-space metrics looking normal. The change must address the documented fault without creating unrelated risk. Which corrective action is most appropriate? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Restrict management exposure, enforce MFA and rate limiting and investigate authentication events and compromised credentials.
  2. Use host and guest metrics to identify hypervisor resource contention, then right-size or rebalance allocations.
  3. Double the guest vCPU count on the same saturated host without measuring ready time.
  4. Correlate ECC and memory training events with physical slots, then replace faulty qualified DIMMs using approved service steps.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Before rollout, confirm the problem with: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This statement concerns Brute-force authentication and account lockout, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

C:

This is the unsafe shortcut in the Hypervisor contention causing guest latency scenario, not a justified remediation or diagnostic. Discriminate using: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks.

D:

This statement concerns Correctable ECC error escalation, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

Question 717

While reviewing the CompTIA Server+ administration incident, a technician learns: An application VM begins swapping heavily after moving to a hypervisor host oversubscribed on RAM, despite guest free-space metrics looking normal. Which principle most directly explains how to address the described issue safely? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Correctable memory errors are early-warning evidence; a rising count can precede uncorrectable failures.
  2. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.
  3. Repeated authentication failures across accounts require identity threat response and management-plane restriction, not weakened lockout controls.
  4. Write-back caching requires reliable protected power or flash persistence; disabling cache can raise latency for safety.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The acceptance test is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts. This is the controlling principle for the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency incident.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This statement concerns Correctable ECC error escalation, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair.

C:

This statement concerns Brute-force authentication and account lockout, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair.

D:

This statement concerns Write cache battery and storage performance, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

Question 718

Before a server change is approved, the on-call engineer receives this incident report: An application VM begins swapping heavily after moving to a hypervisor host oversubscribed on RAM, despite guest free-space metrics looking normal. Which evidence would most directly establish the stated root-cause hypothesis? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Correlate stack traces, error codes, database connection metrics, package versions and deployment history.
  2. Double the guest vCPU count on the same saturated host without measuring ready time.
  3. Examine controller cache mode, BBU/flash status, workload write latency and vendor alerts.
  4. Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

These observations investigate the exact Hypervisor contention causing guest latency failure rather than unrelated components. The expected technical relationship is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

Incorrect Answers

A:

For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. This statement concerns Application crash and dependency triage, a different Server+ technical control.

B:

Instead, the supported correction is: Use host and guest metrics to identify hypervisor resource contention, then right-size or rebalance allocations. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

C:

For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. This statement concerns Write cache battery and storage performance, a different Server+ technical control.

Question 719

After the team implements a targeted remediation for Hypervisor contention causing guest latency, the original incident was: An application VM begins swapping heavily after moving to a hypervisor host oversubscribed on RAM, despite guest free-space metrics looking normal. Which acceptance criterion would best demonstrate a durable and safe resolution? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.
  2. Hardware reports no recurring ECC faults and memory validation passes under representative load.
  3. The fault disappears under an approved version with no unrelated security controls disabled.
  4. Clients obtain unique approved addresses and correct gateways without duplicate-IP warnings.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. Incident: An application VM begins swapping heavily after moving to a hypervisor host oversubscribed on RAM, despite guest free-space metrics looking normal.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This statement concerns Correctable ECC error escalation, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

C:

This statement concerns OS patch regression and rollback, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

D:

This statement concerns DHCP and IP address conflict isolation, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair. For this incident, the relevant principle is: Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping. A targeted investigation checks: Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks. The desired recovery condition is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

Question 720

A change board is planning a verified response to this server event: An application VM begins swapping heavily after moving to a hypervisor host oversubscribed on RAM, despite guest free-space metrics looking normal. For the Hypervisor contention causing guest latency issue, which response elements belong in the approved plan? Select TWO answers.

  1. Use host and guest metrics to identify hypervisor resource contention, then right-size or rebalance allocations.
  2. The fault disappears under an approved version with no unrelated security controls disabled.
  3. Inspect cache-protection health and replace or restore supported battery/flash protection before using safe cache policy.
  4. Compare CPU ready, host memory reclaim, NUMA locality, datastore latency and workload peaks.
  5. Double the guest vCPU count on the same saturated host without measuring ready time.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

A successful outcome is: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

D:

These observations investigate the exact Hypervisor contention causing guest latency failure rather than unrelated components. Confirm remediation through: Application latency normalizes when host contention is reduced without hiding alerts.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This statement concerns OS patch regression and rollback, a different Server+ technical control. It does not directly address the reported Hypervisor contention causing guest latency fault or prove its repair.

C:

That option would inspect cache-protection health and replace or restore supported battery/flash protection before using safe cache policy, but it addresses a different concern. Guest CPU and memory counters alone can mask hypervisor scheduling delay and host swapping.

E:

This is the unsafe shortcut in the Hypervisor contention causing guest latency scenario, not a justified remediation or diagnostic. Incident: An application VM begins swapping heavily after moving to a hypervisor host oversubscribed on RAM, despite guest free-space metrics looking normal.

CompTIA Server+ Certification Exam (SK0-005) Practice Tests