Site icon EfmSoft

What does HRESULT 0x80042701 (VDS_E_NAME_NOT_UNIQUE) mean?

 
Previous Next
VDS_E_SHRINK_DIRTY_VOLUME VDS_E_ADDRESSES_INCOMPLETELY_SET

VDS_E_NAME_NOT_UNIQUE

VDS_E_NAME_NOT_UNIQUE is the failure HRESULT 0x80042701 (signed decimal -2147211519, unsigned decimal 2147755777). Its severity bit is set, the facility field is 4 (FACILITY_ITF), and the facility-specific code field is 0x2701.

The requested VDS name collides with an existing object

This HRESULT states that the specified name is not unique. A documented concrete example is IVdsSubSystemIscsi::CreateTarget, which returns the code when the pwszIscsiName argument duplicates a name already used in the subsystem’s required namespace.

Where the failure boundary lies

The failure is about uniqueness, not syntax or length. It differs from an invalid-name HRESULT and from VDS_S_NAME_TRUNCATED, where a name is accepted but shortened. It also differs from VDS_S_ALREADY_EXISTS, which can report an already-existing object rather than rejection of a conflicting requested name.

Likely causes to separate

Evidence worth preserving

Diagnostic sequence

Retry and recovery

Choose a genuinely unique name or intentionally bind to the existing object after verifying its identity and configuration. Retry with a different generated name is safe only when creating an additional object is the intended outcome. If the existing object came from a timed-out request, reconcile it before creating duplicates.

What this HRESULT does not establish

This HRESULT does not prove that the existing object is equivalent to the requested one, and it does not reveal the collision scope by itself. The invoked interface and provider determine whether uniqueness is host-wide, subsystem-wide, or specific to an object class.

Practical example

Two management nodes concurrently create an iSCSI target using the same policy-derived name. One succeeds; the other receives VDS_E_NAME_NOT_UNIQUE. The losing node must enumerate the target, compare persistent identity and settings, and then decide whether to reuse it or generate a different name.

Guidance for software and telemetry

Do not implement uniqueness as “check, then create” without handling the create-time collision. Return the conflicting scope and proposed alternatives to the user, while keeping persistent IDs separate from mutable display names.

Official Microsoft references


Looking for a different code? Search another status or error code.

Exit mobile version