Microsoft AZ-140 Exam - Topic 2 Question 90 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's AZ-140 exam

Question #: 90
Topic #: 2

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?

AYes

BNo

Show Suggested 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:

Submit Cancel

Lettie

9 months ago

Wait, are you sure? I thought it would work!

upvoted 0 times

...

Cecilia

9 months ago

No way, that doesn't meet the goal at all.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marva

10 months ago

I thought locks were for preventing changes, not connections?

upvoted 0 times

...

Maurine

10 months ago

Totally agree, that's not the right approach!

upvoted 0 times

...

Tien

10 months ago

Adding a lock won't stop new sessions from connecting.

upvoted 0 times

...

Regenia

10 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

11 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

11 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

11 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

11 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

11 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

11 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

11 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

2 years 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

1 year ago

User2: Agreed, we need to find a way to let the active sessions finish before shutting down the host.

upvoted 0 times

...

Daron

1 year ago

User1: I think adding a lock might not be the best solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jarod

2 years 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

2 years 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

2 years ago

No, adding a lock on Host1 will not prevent new user sessions without disconnecting active ones.

upvoted 0 times

...

Claribel

2 years 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

1 year ago

User2: No, we should use the 'Drain' option to allow users to log off first.

upvoted 0 times

...

Virgie

2 years ago

User1: Yes, adding a lock should prevent new sessions.

upvoted 0 times

...

Aja

2 years 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

1 year ago

User4: That sounds like a good idea, let's try setting Host1 to drain mode before shutting it down.

upvoted 0 times

...

Maryrose

1 year ago

User3: Maybe we can set Host1 to drain mode to finish active sessions before maintenance.

upvoted 0 times

...

Wilburn

1 year ago

User2: I agree, we need to find a way to gracefully drain the active sessions before shutting down Host1.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shannan

2 years ago

User1: I think adding a lock on Host1 will prevent new sessions, but what about the active ones?

upvoted 0 times

...

Jarod

2 years ago

Yes, adding a lock on Host1 will prevent new user sessions without disconnecting active ones.

upvoted 0 times

...