New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Microsoft AZ-140 Exam - Topic 2 Question 90 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's AZ-140 exam
Question #: 90
Topic #: 2
[All AZ-140 Questions]

You have an Azure Virtual Desktop host pool that runs Windows 10 Enterprise multi-session. User sessions are load-balanced between the session hosts. Idle session timeout is 30 minutes. You plan to shut down a session host named Host1 to perform routine maintenance. You need to prevent new user sessions to Host1 without disconnecting active user sessions.

Solution: From the Azure portal, add lock on Host1. Does this meet the goal?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Kiley at Feb 09, 2025, 07:39 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium AZ-140 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Lettie
3 months ago
Wait, are you sure? I thought it would work!
upvoted 0 times
...
Cecilia
3 months ago
No way, that doesn't meet the goal at all.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marva
3 months ago
I thought locks were for preventing changes, not connections?
upvoted 0 times
...
Maurine
4 months ago
Totally agree, that's not the right approach!
upvoted 0 times
...
Tien
4 months ago
Adding a lock won't stop new sessions from connecting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Regenia
4 months ago
I vaguely recall that we might need to change the session host's status instead of just adding a lock.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jettie
4 months ago
I think the answer is B because we need to prevent new sessions, and locking doesn't actually stop that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sarah
4 months ago
I feel like we discussed something similar in class about managing session hosts, but I'm not entirely sure if a lock is the right approach here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Latrice
5 months ago
I remember that locking a VM doesn't prevent new sessions from being assigned to it, so I think this won't meet the goal.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vallie
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused on this one. I'm not sure if adding a lock is the right solution here. Wouldn't that just prevent any access to the host, including the active sessions? I'll need to research this a bit more to make sure I understand the right way to approach it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Floyd
5 months ago
Ah, I see what they're asking. Preventing new sessions from being assigned to Host1 while keeping the active ones running sounds like a good approach. I'm pretty confident that adding a lock on the host should do the trick, but I'll verify that in the portal just to be sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beckie
5 months ago
Okay, let me see. I think the key here is to prevent new user sessions from being assigned to Host1, while keeping the active sessions running. Adding a lock might work, but I'm not 100% sure. I'll need to double-check the documentation on this.
upvoted 0 times
...
Val
5 months ago
Hmm, this seems like a tricky one. I'm not sure if adding a lock on the session host will prevent new sessions from being assigned to it. I'll need to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Daniel
12 months ago
I'm with Aja on this one. The lock might stop new sessions, but the active ones could still get the boot. We need to find a way to let the users finish up their work before taking the host offline.
upvoted 0 times
Jenelle
11 months ago
User2: Agreed, we need to find a way to let the active sessions finish before shutting down the host.
upvoted 0 times
...
Daron
11 months ago
User1: I think adding a lock might not be the best solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jarod
1 year ago
I think the solution is correct because adding a lock on Host1 will effectively prevent new user sessions while allowing active ones to continue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashanti
1 year ago
Haha, locking the host? That's like putting a padlock on your computer to stop people from using it. I think we need a more elegant solution here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Crista
1 year ago
No, adding a lock on Host1 will not prevent new user sessions without disconnecting active ones.
upvoted 0 times
...
Claribel
1 year ago
The lock should work to prevent new sessions, but I'm worried about the active sessions. Maybe we could try using the 'Drain' option to give users a chance to log off before shutting down the host.
upvoted 0 times
Kimberlie
12 months ago
User2: No, we should use the 'Drain' option to allow users to log off first.
upvoted 0 times
...
Virgie
12 months ago
User1: Yes, adding a lock should prevent new sessions.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Aja
1 year ago
Locking the host sounds like a good way to prevent new sessions, but I'm not sure it will keep the active sessions from being disconnected. We'll need to find a way to gracefully drain the sessions first.
upvoted 0 times
Dalene
11 months ago
User4: That sounds like a good idea, let's try setting Host1 to drain mode before shutting it down.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maryrose
11 months ago
User3: Maybe we can set Host1 to drain mode to finish active sessions before maintenance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wilburn
11 months ago
User2: I agree, we need to find a way to gracefully drain the active sessions before shutting down Host1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shannan
1 year ago
User1: I think adding a lock on Host1 will prevent new sessions, but what about the active ones?
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jarod
1 year ago
Yes, adding a lock on Host1 will prevent new user sessions without disconnecting active ones.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel