Academy/VCP-VCF 9.0 Architect (2V0-13.25)/vSAN Storage Design with Erasure Coding
This lab targets VCF 9.0

vSAN Storage Design with Erasure Coding

VCF 9.0Intermediatevcp-foundation⏱ 90 min

VCF 9.0 vSAN ESA architecture — storage policies, erasure coding, capacity planning, and encryption

Objectives

  • Design vSAN ESA storage architecture with appropriate failure tolerance
  • Calculate usable capacity for mirroring vs erasure coding configurations
  • Create storage policies aligned to workload tier requirements
  • Plan vSAN encryption with native key management
  • Evaluate deduplication and compression ratios for mixed workloads

Prerequisites

Access to VCF 9.0 and vSAN documentation; capacity planning spreadsheets

Prior labs: vcp-architect-01, vcp-architect-02

Required skills:

  • Understanding of vSAN concepts (OSA vs ESA)
  • Storage capacity planning
  • Familiarity with RAID levels and failure domain concepts

Lab Environment

Design exercise — validate storage policy concepts on Holodeck vSAN cluster if available

Tasks

Task 1 vSAN ESA Architecture & Capacity Planning

VCDX panelists frequently challenge storage sizing. You must show the full chain: raw capacity → FTT overhead → slack space → filesystem overhead → usable capacity. Candidates who just state 'we need X TB' without showing the math fail.

Design the vSAN ESA storage foundation with accurate capacity math showing raw-to-usable conversion under different protection schemes.

Step 1

Document vSAN ESA vs OSA architecture differences (VCF 9.0):

vSAN ESA (Express Storage Architecture) — Default for VCF 9.0:

  • Single storage tier: NVMe devices only (no cache/capacity split)
  • Minimum: 1 NVMe TLC device per storage pool per host
  • Native snapshots with improved performance (no CoW chain degradation)
  • Improved compression/dedup efficiency (operates on original data, not cached data)
  • Support for RAID-5/6 erasure coding from 4-host clusters (vs 5+ for OSA)
  • Object write path: direct to storage pool, no caching tier

vSAN OSA (Original Storage Architecture):

  • Two tiers: Cache (SSD/NVMe) + Capacity (SSD/HDD)
  • Cache tier: 10% of capacity tier recommended
  • Disk groups: max 5 per host, 1 cache + max 7 capacity per group
  • More complex failure domain: disk group failure affects all capacity disks in group

Design decision: Select ESA for new VCF 9.0 deployments. OSA only for brownfield with existing HDD investments.

Step 2

Calculate raw capacity for the cluster:

Assume: 8-host workload cluster, each host has 4 × 3.84 TB NVMe SSDs
Raw capacity: 8 hosts × 4 disks × 3.84 TB = 122.88 TB raw

Capacity deductions (in order):

1. vSAN metadata overhead: ~1-2% → 122.88 × 0.98 = 120.42 TB
2. Slack space (for rebalancing/maintenance): 25-30% reserve → 120.42 × 0.70 = 84.30 TB
   Note: 25% is minimum for maintenance mode evacuation; 30% recommended for production
3. Filesystem overhead: ~2% → 84.30 × 0.98 = 82.61 TB after overhead

Available for FTT protection: 82.61 TB

Step 3

Compare protection schemes and usable capacity:

ProtectionMethodMin HostsOverheadUsable from 82.61 TBWhen to Use
FTT=1 MirrorRAID-132×41.30 TBSmall clusters, high IOPS
FTT=1 RAID-5Erasure Coding41.33×62.03 TB≥4 hosts, read-heavy
FTT=2 MirrorRAID-1 (triple)53×27.54 TBMission-critical, small
FTT=2 RAID-6Erasure Coding61.5×55.07 TB≥6 hosts, critical data

Capacity gain from erasure coding vs mirroring:

  • FTT=1: RAID-5 provides 50% more usable capacity than mirroring (62 vs 41 TB)
  • FTT=2: RAID-6 provides 100% more than triple-mirror (55 vs 28 TB)

Performance trade-off:

  • Erasure coding has higher CPU overhead for parity calculation
  • Write amplification: ~1.33× for RAID-5 vs 2× for mirror, but parity is compute-intensive
  • ESA mitigates this with improved code paths — erasure coding is production-viable on ESA
Step 4

Map storage requirements to capacity:

Workload storage needs (from capacity model):

  • Tier-1 VMs (80): avg 200 GB × 80 = 16 TB
  • Tier-2 VMs (300): avg 150 GB × 300 = 45 TB
  • Tier-3 VMs (220): avg 100 GB × 220 = 22 TB
  • Total required: 83 TB usable

Fit analysis:

- FTT=1 Mirror: 41 TB usable → INSUFFICIENT (need 83 TB)
- FTT=1 RAID-5: 62 TB usable → INSUFFICIENT
  • Options: Add more disks, add hosts, or split protection by tier

Recommended: Tiered protection strategy:

  • Tier-1 (16 TB): FTT=2 RAID-6 on Tier-1 cluster (separate domain, own capacity)
  • Tier-2/3 (67 TB): FTT=1 RAID-5 on consolidated cluster
  • This requires separate vSAN datastores per workload domain (VCF native architecture)

Validation Gate

Check: Capacity calculations show full raw-to-usable chain with FTT overhead for each protection scheme

Expected: At minimum: raw → metadata → slack → filesystem → FTT usable capacity, with comparison table of mirroring vs erasure coding

Common Errors

Forgetting slack space deduction — without 25-30% slack, vSAN cannot rebalance during host maintenance and may refuse to enter maintenance mode
Using OSA disk group terminology for ESA — ESA has no disk groups, no cache tier, no cache-to-capacity ratio
Assuming FTT=1 RAID-5 works on 3-host clusters — erasure coding requires minimum 4 hosts for RAID-5, 6 for RAID-6
Not accounting for VM snapshots consuming additional capacity — active snapshots can grow capacity requirements 20-50%

Task 2 Storage Policy Design & Datastore Layout

Storage policies are the enforcement mechanism for design intent. VCDX evaluators check that policies are not generic 'one-size-fits-all' but are tailored to each workload tier with clear rationale.

Create vSAN storage policies that align protection levels and performance characteristics with workload tiers.

Step 1

Design storage policies for each workload tier:

Policy: Tier-1-Critical

  • Failures to tolerate (FTT): 2
  • Failure tolerance method: RAID-6 (erasure coding)
  • Object space reservation (thick provisioning): 25% (for database workloads)
  • IOPS limit: None (unlimited)
  • Force provisioning: No
  • Deduplication and compression: Enabled (ESA — compression-only for database if dedup ratio < 1.5:1)
  • Encryption: Enabled (vSAN native encryption, AES-256)
  • Checksum: Enabled (object-level CRC)

Policy: Tier-2-Business

  • FTT: 1
  • Failure tolerance method: RAID-5
  • Object space reservation: 0% (thin provisioned)
  • IOPS limit: 2,000 per VM (prevent noisy neighbor)
  • Force provisioning: No
  • Deduplication and compression: Enabled
  • Encryption: Enabled

Policy: Tier-3-DevTest

  • FTT: 1
  • Failure tolerance method: RAID-5
  • Object space reservation: 0%
  • IOPS limit: 1,000 per VM
  • Force provisioning: Yes (allow provisioning even if policy cannot be fully satisfied — acceptable for dev/test)
  • Deduplication and compression: Enabled
  • Encryption: Optional (depends on data classification)
Step 2

Design IOPS and throughput controls:

vSAN QoS (IOPS limits):

  • Purpose: Prevent noisy-neighbor effect where one VM starves others
  • Tier-1: No limit (critical workloads get priority)
  • Tier-2: 2,000 IOPS per VMDK (sufficient for most business apps)
  • Tier-3: 1,000 IOPS per VMDK (dev/test can tolerate throttling)

Storage I/O Control (SIOC) — not available on vSAN (uses native QoS instead)

Document expected IOPS per host:

  • ESA with NVMe: ~200K-400K IOPS per host (depending on device and workload)
  • 8-host cluster: ~1.6M-3.2M IOPS total (theoretical)
  • Overhead from RAID-5: ~15-20% reduction in write IOPS
  • Target: maintain <5ms latency at P99 for Tier-1 workloads
Step 3

Plan deduplication and compression:

ESA dedup/compression behavior:

  • Operates inline (during write) — no post-process cycle needed
  • ESA dedup is block-level (4K granularity)
  • Compression: LZ4 (fast, moderate ratio) applied after dedup
  • Cannot selectively enable/disable per VM — it is a cluster-wide setting in ESA

(Note: In ESA, dedup+compression is either ON or OFF for the entire cluster)

Expected ratios by workload type:

WorkloadDedup RatioCompression RatioCombined
General server (Windows/Linux)1.2-1.5:11.5-2.0:12.0-3.0:1
VDI (linked clones)2.0-4.0:11.5-2.0:13.0-8.0:1
Database (unique data)1.0-1.2:11.5-2.5:11.5-3.0:1
Dev/Test (golden images)2.0-3.0:11.5-2.0:13.0-6.0:1

Apply to capacity calculation:

  • Conservative estimate: 2.0:1 combined ratio
  • 62 TB usable (FTT=1 RAID-5) × 2.0 = 124 TB effective capacity
  • This changes the fit analysis: now sufficient for 83 TB requirement with headroom
Step 4

Design vSAN datastore layout:

VCF architecture: Each workload domain gets its own vSAN datastore automatically

  • Management domain: vSAN datastore for management VMs (dedicated)
  • Workload Domain 1 (Tier-1): vSAN datastore with Tier-1-Critical policy as default
  • Workload Domain 2 (Tier-2/3): vSAN datastore with Tier-2-Business policy as default

Additional datastores:

  • vSAN HCI Mesh (if needed): Share unused capacity across workload domains without vMotion
    • Use case: Workload Domain 2 has excess capacity; Workload Domain 1 can mount it remotely
    • Constraint: Remote datastore performance is lower (network hop); suitable for Tier-3 only
  • NFS/VMFS datastores (if external storage exists):
    • Use for backup targets, ISO libraries, templates
    • Never mix vSAN + external storage for the same workload tier (inconsistent performance)

Document: Default storage policy per datastore, exceptions, and the policy change workflow.

Validation Gate

Check: Storage policies defined for each tier with FTT, encryption, QoS, and dedup settings; datastore layout documented

Expected: 3+ storage policies with distinct settings, IOPS limits for noisy-neighbor prevention, dedup/compression ratio estimates with capacity impact, datastore-per-domain layout

Common Errors

Assuming dedup/compression can be enabled per-VM on ESA — it is a cluster-wide setting
Setting Force Provisioning = Yes for production workloads — this allows VMs to run without protection, violating availability SLAs
Forgetting that vSAN IOPS limits are per-VMDK, not per-VM — a VM with 3 VMDKs each at 2,000 IOPS limit gets 6,000 IOPS total
Using optimistic dedup ratios (5:1) for capacity planning — always size using conservative ratios (2:1) and treat savings as bonus headroom

Task 3 vSAN Encryption & Key Management Design

Encryption design is critical for compliance (SOC 2, HIPAA, PCI-DSS). VCDX panelists check key management hierarchy, key rotation strategy, and failure scenarios (KMS unavailable).

Design end-to-end encryption for data at rest using vSAN native encryption with proper key management architecture.

Step 1

Design key management hierarchy:

vSAN encryption uses a two-tier key model:

  1. Key Encryption Key (KEK): Stored in external KMS or vCenter Native Key Provider
  • Encrypts/wraps the DEK
  • Rotated annually (or per compliance policy)
  • If KEK is lost: data is permanently inaccessible
  1. Data Encryption Key (DEK): Generated per host, stored locally (encrypted by KEK)
  • Used for actual data encryption (AES-256-XTS)
  • Re-wrapped when KEK rotates (data is NOT re-encrypted)
  • Shallow re-key: New KEK wraps existing DEK (fast, no I/O)
  • Deep re-key: New DEK generated, data re-encrypted (slow, I/O intensive)

Key Provider options:
A) vCenter Native Key Provider (NKP):

  • Built into vCenter 7.0u2+ and 9.0
  • No external KMS needed
  • Keys backed up via vCenter backup
  • Limitation: Single point of failure if vCenter backup is lost

B) External KMS (KMIP 1.1 compliant):

  • Examples: HyTrust KeyControl, Thales CipherTrust, Entrust
  • HA: Deploy KMS cluster (2+ nodes)
  • Stronger compliance posture (separation of key management from infrastructure)

Design decision: External KMS for production (SOC 2 requirement), NKP for dev/test (cost savings).

Step 2

Configure encryption layers:

Layer 1 — vSAN Data-at-Rest Encryption:

  • Enabled at cluster level
  • Encrypts all data on vSAN datastore (VM files, swap, snapshots, metadata)
  • Performance impact: 5-10% overhead on write IOPS (AES-NI hardware acceleration)
  • Verify: Hosts must have AES-NI instruction support (all modern Xeon/EPYC do)

Layer 2 — VM Encryption (vSphere-level, optional):

  • Per-VM encryption using storage policy
  • Encrypts VMDK at the vSphere layer before reaching vSAN
  • Double encryption warning: Enabling both vSAN encryption AND VM encryption creates double encryption overhead with no security benefit
  • Recommendation: Use vSAN encryption for all VMs; add VM encryption only for cross-vCenter vMotion scenarios (encrypts data in transit)

Layer 3 — vSAN in-transit encryption:

  • Encrypts vSAN data replication traffic between hosts
  • Options: Cluster-only (within cluster) or Preferred/Required
  • Performance: Adds ~5% latency to vSAN replication
  • Recommended: Enable for compliance environments
Step 3

Design key rotation and lifecycle:

  1. Key rotation schedule:
  • KEK rotation: Annually (shallow re-key, minimal impact)
  • DEK rotation: Every 3 years or after suspected compromise (deep re-key, plan maintenance window)
  • Post-incident rotation: Immediate shallow re-key after any security event
  1. Key backup and recovery:
  • NKP: Keys included in vCenter file-level backup; backup to separate secure location
  • External KMS: KMS cluster handles replication; backup KMS database independently
  • Test recovery: Quarterly test of key recovery procedure (restore vCenter from backup, verify data accessibility)
  1. Failure scenarios:
  • KMS unavailable during host boot: Host cannot mount vSAN datastore; VMs do not start

Mitigation: KMS cluster with 2+ nodes across failure domains

  • vCenter down: Existing hosts continue running (keys cached in memory); new hosts cannot join

Mitigation: Ensure vCenter HA is configured; documented break-glass procedure for emergency vCenter recovery

  • KEK lost permanently: Data is UNRECOVERABLE

Mitigation: Multiple KMS backup copies in geographically separate locations

Step 4

Create encryption design decision entry:

Decision D-006 — Encryption Architecture:
Decision: vSAN data-at-rest encryption with external KMS for Tier-1/2, NKP for Tier-3
Alternatives:
A) VM-level encryption per policy — Rejected: more complex policy management, double encryption risk, vMotion encryption is separate anyway
B) No encryption, rely on physical security — Rejected: SOC 2 requires encryption at rest, drive disposal risk
C) Full-disk encryption (SED drives) — Rejected: vendor lock-in, limited key management flexibility, no integration with vSphere policy framework

Compliance mapping:

  • SOC 2 CC6.1: Encryption of data at rest ✓
  • SOC 2 CC6.7: Key management separation ✓ (external KMS)
  • NIST 800-171: FIPS 140-2 validated algorithm (AES-256) ✓

Document the key management network design:

  • KMS communication: KMIP port 5696 (TCP)
  • Network: Dedicated management VLAN, firewalled
- vCenter → KMS: Mutual TLS authentication (client certificate)

Validation Gate

Check: Encryption design covers all three layers with key management hierarchy, rotation schedule, and failure scenarios

Expected: Two-tier key hierarchy documented, KMS HA architecture designed, rotation schedule defined, 3+ failure scenarios analyzed with mitigation, compliance mapping completed

Common Errors

Enabling both vSAN encryption and VM encryption simultaneously — this creates double encryption with no security benefit and ~15-20% performance penalty
Using vCenter Native Key Provider without proper backup — if vCenter backup is lost and host KEK cache expires, all data is permanently lost
Forgetting that deep re-key requires all VMs to be encrypted with new DEK — this is extremely I/O intensive and requires a maintenance window
Not testing KMS failure recovery — quarterly drills should verify that data remains accessible after KMS failover

Task 4 vSAN Health Monitoring & Maintenance Design

A VCDX design is not complete without operational runbooks. Panelists probe whether candidates understand what happens during day-2 operations: maintenance mode data evacuation, disk replacement, and capacity exhaustion.

Design the ongoing operational framework for vSAN health monitoring, maintenance mode behavior, and capacity alerts.

Step 1

Design vSAN Health monitoring integration:

  1. vSAN Health Service checks to monitor:
  • Cluster health: Overall status, network partition detection
  • Disk health: Disk balance, disk latency, congestion
  • Data health: Object health, policy compliance, stale components
  • Network health: vSAN VMkernel connectivity, multicast/unicast status
  • Physical disk health: SMART data, wear indicators for NVMe
  1. Aria Operations integration:
  • Enable vSAN management pack
  • Custom dashboards: Capacity trending, IOPS distribution, resync progress
   - Alerts: NVMe wear level >80% → Warning; >90% → Critical
   - Capacity alert thresholds:
     - 70% used → Warning (plan procurement)
     - 80% used → Critical (restrict new VM provisioning)
     - 85% used → Emergency (begin workload migration or expansion)
  1. Skyline Health (Broadcom):
  • Proactive support: Auto-detects known issues against KB articles
  • Requires outbound HTTPS — for air-gapped: use Skyline Collector appliance
Step 2

Design maintenance mode behavior:

Three evacuation modes:

  1. Ensure data accessibility (fastest):
  • Moves data components to maintain accessibility but does not rebuild full protection
   - Data is temporarily at reduced FTT (e.g., FTT=2 → FTT=1 during maintenance)
  • Use for: Short maintenance (<4 hours), patching, firmware updates
  1. Full data migration (slowest, safest):
  • Rebuilds all components on remaining hosts to maintain full FTT
  • Requires sufficient free capacity on other hosts
  • Use for: Host decommission, extended maintenance (>24 hours)
  • Capacity requirement: Host's capacity × FTT multiplier must fit on remaining hosts
  1. No data migration (fastest, risk):
  • Does not move any data; VMs are migrated but data components remain on offline host
  • If another host fails during maintenance, data loss possible
  • Use for: Quick reboot only (< 15 minutes)

Design decision: Default to 'Ensure accessibility' for patching; require change approval for 'No data migration'

Step 3

Plan disk replacement and expansion procedures:

  1. Disk failure replacement:
  • vSAN ESA auto-detects disk failure and begins component rebuild on remaining disks
  • Rebuild time depends on data volume and cluster load (~100 GB/hour estimate)
  • During rebuild: Performance degraded (~20-30% IOPS reduction cluster-wide)
  • After physical replacement: vSAN reclaims new disk automatically (ESA — no disk group concept)
  1. Capacity expansion options:

a) Add disks to existing hosts:

  • Hot-add NVMe supported on most server platforms
  • vSAN discovers new disk, adds to storage pool
  • Rebalance starts automatically (proactive rebalance in ESA)

b) Add hosts to cluster:

      - VCF workflow: SDDC Manager → Add Host to Cluster
  • New host contributes storage pool capacity + compute
  • Minimum host add: 1 host at a time
  • Post-add: Enable vSAN proactive rebalance for even distribution

c) HCI Mesh (share capacity across domains):

  • Remote mount of vSAN datastore from another cluster
  • Latency: +1-2ms over direct local access
  • Use case: Short-term capacity relief while procurement completes
Step 4

Create operational design documentation:

  1. Capacity planning cadence:
  • Monthly: Review vSAN capacity usage trending in Aria Operations
  • Quarterly: Procurement forecast based on growth rate
  • Annual: Full capacity audit with lifecycle refresh planning
  1. Maintenance window design:
  • Host maintenance: Serial, one host at a time, minimum 4 hours between hosts
  • Reason: vSAN resync must complete before next host enters maintenance
  • Monitor: vSAN resync dashboard — proceed only when resync objects = 0
  • Sequence: Follow VCF upgrade order (KB 390634) — SDDC Manager first, then management domain, then workload domains
  1. Design decision entry:

Decision D-007 — Maintenance Mode Default:
Decision: 'Ensure data accessibility' as default evacuation mode
Alternative: 'Full data migration' — Rejected as default: too slow for routine patching (8+ hours per host in large clusters)
Alternative: 'No data migration' — Rejected as default: unacceptable data-loss risk during host reboot failure
Risk: If second host fails during maintenance with 'Ensure accessibility', data at reduced FTT
Mitigation: Health pre-check before maintenance; abort if any components already in degraded state

Validation Gate

Check: Operational design covers health monitoring, maintenance procedures, and capacity management

Expected: Alert thresholds defined, maintenance mode policy documented with alternatives, disk replacement/expansion procedures outlined, capacity planning cadence established

Common Errors

Using 'Full data migration' for routine patching — this can take 8+ hours per host and delays the entire maintenance window
Not checking vSAN resync status before proceeding to next host — putting a second host in maintenance while resync is active can cause data unavailability
Ignoring NVMe wear indicators — SSDs have finite write endurance; once SMART reports >90% wear, replacement must be expedited
Setting capacity alerts too close to full (>90%) — at 85%+ capacity, vSAN performance degrades significantly and resync operations may stall

Final Validation

Complete vSAN storage design with capacity math, tiered policies, encryption architecture, and operational procedures

✓ Capacity calculations show raw-to-usable chain → Full math with metadata, slack, overhead, and FTT deductions documented

✓ Storage policies defined per tier → 3+ policies with FTT, QoS, dedup/compression, and encryption settings

✓ Encryption design includes key management → KEK/DEK hierarchy, KMS HA, rotation schedule, and failure recovery documented

✓ Operational procedures documented → Maintenance mode policy, disk replacement, capacity alerts, and monitoring integration

Cleanup / Restore

• Save all design documents and capacity models

• If using Holodeck: revert vSAN configuration to base snapshot

Design Reflection (VCDX)

Storage design separates good architects from great ones. VCDX panelists probe three areas relentlessly: (1) Show the capacity math — raw to usable, including slack space that most candidates forget. (2) Justify your protection scheme — why RAID-5 over mirroring? The answer must include host count, performance impact, and cost trade-off. (3) What happens when things break? Disk failure during maintenance, KMS outage, capacity exhaustion. The operational design is where VCDX candidates differentiate.

Requirements

  • 83 TB usable storage across 3 tiers with different protection levels
  • Encryption at rest for SOC 2 compliance (AES-256)
  • IOPS limits to prevent noisy-neighbor effects between workload tiers
  • Capacity for 3-year growth at 20% p.a.

Constraints

  • vSAN ESA: minimum 1 NVMe TLC device per storage pool per host
  • Deduplication/compression is cluster-wide in ESA (cannot per-VM)
  • VCF workload domains have isolated vSAN datastores
  • Per-core licensing affects host addition cost decisions

Assumptions

  • NVMe devices are 3.84 TB TLC SSDs (HCL-certified)
  • Conservative dedup/compression ratio of 2.0:1 for capacity planning
  • Mixed workload I/O profile: 70% read, 30% write
  • AES-NI hardware acceleration available on all hosts

Risks

  • Actual dedup ratio lower than estimated — capacity runs out sooner
  • NVMe SSD endurance reached before refresh cycle (high-write workloads)
  • KMS failure renders all encrypted data inaccessible until recovery
  • Capacity expansion procurement takes 8-12 weeks — insufficient lead time if alerts trigger late

Self-Assessment Discussion Prompts

  1. When would you choose FTT=2 Mirror over FTT=2 RAID-6, given the 3× vs 1.5× capacity overhead?
  2. If the customer refuses external KMS due to cost, what is the risk posture of using Native Key Provider for production?
  3. How would you redesign storage if the customer adds a VDI workload (500 desktops) to the existing cluster?
  4. What is the impact on resync time if you add a 9th host to the 8-host cluster — does it speed up or slow down existing operations?

Extensions

vSAN Stretched Cluster Storage Considerations

Extend the storage design for a stretched cluster spanning two sites. Address site affinity policies (keep replicas co-located with compute), witness storage requirements, and the capacity impact of cross-site FTT configurations. Calculate the WAN bandwidth needed for synchronous replication of vSAN write traffic.

vSAN HCI Mesh Cross-Cluster Storage Sharing

Design a vSAN HCI Mesh topology where a compute-heavy cluster mounts remote datastores from a storage-rich cluster. Document the performance trade-offs (additional network hop), the fault domain implications, and the use cases where HCI Mesh is preferable to adding local storage.

vSAN Performance Benchmarking with HCIBench

Use HCIBench (VMware's open-source vSAN benchmarking tool) on Holodeck to measure IOPS, latency, and throughput under different FTT and dedup/compression configurations. Compare ESA vs OSA performance profiles and document the results for inclusion in the VCDX design document.

⚠ Known Pitfalls (from Community KB)

Using OSA disk group terminology (cache tier, capacity tier, disk groups) when designing for ESA — ESA has a single-tier storage pool with no disk groups, and applying OSA concepts leads to incorrect sizing
Sizing capacity without slack space — vSAN requires 25-30% free space for rebalancing, maintenance mode evacuation, and component rebuilds. Without it, maintenance operations will be blocked
Assuming dedup/compression ratios from vendor marketing (often 5:1+) — always use conservative ratios (2:1) for planning. Actual ratios depend heavily on workload data patterns and cannot be predicted accurately before deployment
Enabling vSAN encryption without testing KMS failover — in a real scenario, KMS unavailability during host reboot means hosts cannot mount vSAN and all VMs on those hosts stay offline until KMS is restored

References

  • vSAN 9.0 Planning and Deployment Guide — ESA Architecture chapter
  • vSAN 9.0 Design Guide — Capacity Planning and Sizing
  • VMware KB 2150753 — vSAN Capacity Planning considerations
  • vSAN Encryption — Native Key Provider vs External KMS comparison
  • vSAN Health Service documentation — Alert thresholds and remediation
Was this page useful?
Type to search. ↑ ↓ to move, Enter to open, Esc to close.