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 DP-300 Exam - Topic 11 Question 87 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's DP-300 exam
Question #: 87
Topic #: 11
[All DP-300 Questions]

You have an instance of SQL Server on Azure Virtual Machines named VM1.

You need to implement a disaster recovery solution that meets the following requirements:

* Returns the solution to an operational state within 15 minutes of a failure

* Can perform disaster recovery testing in an isolated environment

* Minimizes administrative effort

What should you include in the solution?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/site-recovery/site-recovery-sql#combining-bcdr-technologies-with-site-recovery


by Art at Apr 08, 2024, 05:53 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium DP-300 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Val
3 months ago
Active geo-replication is cool, but it might not minimize admin effort as much.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jennifer
4 months ago
Wait, can Azure Site Recovery really meet all those requirements?
upvoted 0 times
...
Sabra
4 months ago
Auto-failover groups could work too, but not sure about the testing part.
upvoted 0 times
...
Telma
4 months ago
I disagree, a failover cluster instance might be more reliable.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mireya
4 months ago
Azure Site Recovery is the best choice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beatriz
4 months ago
Active geo-replication seems like a good option, but I wonder if it really minimizes administrative effort as required.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vincent
5 months ago
Auto-failover groups sound familiar, but I can't recall if they allow for disaster recovery testing in isolation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lakeesha
5 months ago
I think a failover cluster instance could work, but it might be more complex than what we need for minimal admin effort.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thomasena
5 months ago
I remember studying Azure Site Recovery, but I'm not sure if it meets the 15-minute recovery time requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delila
5 months ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm leaning towards Azure Site Recovery since it seems to hit all the key requirements - quick recovery time, isolated testing, and lower admin overhead. But I'll need to double-check the details on the other options to be sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Renea
5 months ago
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The requirements mention minimizing administrative effort, so I'm not sure if a failover cluster instance (FCI) would be the best fit since that requires more setup and maintenance. Maybe auto-failover groups or active geo-replication could be simpler options to consider.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ellsworth
5 months ago
This looks like a classic disaster recovery scenario. I think Azure Site Recovery would be the best option to meet the requirements - it can get you back up and running in 15 minutes and allows for isolated DR testing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ricarda
5 months ago
Azure Site Recovery seems like the obvious choice here. It's designed specifically for disaster recovery and can get you back up and running fast. The ability to test in an isolated environment is a big plus too. I feel pretty confident that this is the right solution for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Luisa
5 months ago
I think when ZTP is in cancel mode, you might actually need to issue the write memory command to stop it from triggering again.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nana
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got this. Phishing is a social engineering attack, so it would fall under the "Cracker/Hacker Attacks" category. I'm going with option B.
upvoted 0 times
...
Francesco
5 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the options here. AWS Shield, Elastic Load Balancing, and Amazon Cognito don't seem directly related to mitigating cross-site scripting vulnerabilities. I'll have to review the service descriptions to make sure I understand the differences.
upvoted 0 times
...
Freeman
2 years ago
Active geo-replication can help minimize administrative effort as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Coletta
2 years ago
I believe we should also consider active geo-replication for disaster recovery testing in an isolated environment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sylvie
2 years ago
Azure Site Recovery can meet the requirement of returning to an operational state within 15 minutes of a failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominga
2 years ago
Why do you think Azure Site Recovery is the best option?
upvoted 0 times
...
Sylvie
2 years ago
I think we should include Azure Site Recovery in the solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bettina
2 years ago
Auto-failover groups could help minimize administrative effort in the solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chau
2 years ago
I believe active geo-replication would also be a good option to consider for disaster recovery testing in an isolated environment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elke
2 years ago
I agree. Azure Site Recovery can help us meet the requirement of returning to an operational state within 15 minutes of a failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eliz
2 years ago
I think we should include Azure Site Recovery in the solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Asuncion
2 years ago
Ha, yeah, the last thing we need is more work for the admins. They're probably already drowning in tickets as it is.
upvoted 0 times
Peggie
2 years ago
I agree, auto-failover groups would allow for testing in an isolated environment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Huey
2 years ago
C) auto-failover groups
upvoted 0 times
...
Brunilda
2 years ago
Definitely! That would minimize administrative effort for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eric
2 years ago
A) Azure Site Recovery
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Teresita
2 years ago
You know, I was leaning towards active geo-replication, but after hearing you all discuss it, I think auto-failover groups might be the way to go. The isolated testing environment is a really important feature, and the quick recovery time is crucial. Plus, I'm all about minimizing administrative effort - who wants to be babysitting their disaster recovery solution all day?
upvoted 0 times
...
Quinn
2 years ago
Haha, a superhero team for your database, I love it! But in all seriousness, I think I'm going to go with option C - auto-failover groups. The ability to perform disaster recovery testing in an isolated environment is a huge plus, and the quick recovery time is essential. Plus, it just sounds like the most low-maintenance solution of the bunch.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arthur
2 years ago
Personally, I'd avoid the failover cluster instance. That's going to require a lot more hands-on management, and we want to minimize the admin effort, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Angelo
2 years ago
I agree, this is a tough call. I'm leaning towards auto-failover groups or active geo-replication. They both seem to hit the key requirements, and they should minimize administrative effort compared to some of the other options. Although, I have to admit, the idea of a failover cluster instance is kind of appealing - it's like a superhero team for your database!
upvoted 0 times
Alaine
2 years ago
D) active geo-replication
upvoted 0 times
...
Claribel
2 years ago
C) auto-failover groups
upvoted 0 times
...
Cornell
2 years ago
B) a failover cluster instance (FCI)
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Polly
2 years ago
But what about the other options? A failover cluster instance could work, and auto-failover groups or active geo-replication might be good too. Tough call.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marica
2 years ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm torn between a few options here. Azure Site Recovery seems like a good fit for the quick recovery time, but I'm not sure if it allows for isolated disaster recovery testing. The failover cluster instance could work, but that might require more administrative effort than we want. Auto-failover groups and active geo-replication both seem like strong contenders too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thaddeus
2 years ago
Hmm, I'm thinking Azure Site Recovery might be the way to go here. It ticks all the boxes - fast recovery, isolation for testing, and minimal admin effort.
upvoted 0 times
...
Glory
2 years ago
Yeah, seriously. I mean, 15 minutes to recover? That's a pretty tight turnaround.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brande
2 years ago
Oh man, this question seems like a tricky one. Gotta make sure we nail the requirements here.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel