Microsoft Certified: Azure Administrator AssociateImplement and manage storageMedium
A company is migrating a legacy application that stores files on a Windows SMB share to Azure. The application requires consistent low-latency access to files and uses a small, fixed set of files that are frequently updated. Which Azure storage solution would be the most cost-effective while meeting these performance requirements?
- AAzure Standard File Share with GRS redundancy
- BAzure NetApp Files (Standard tier) with ZRS redundancy
- CAzure Blob Storage (Hot tier) with a custom file system driver
- DAzure Premium File Share with LRS redundancy
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. Azure Premium File Share with LRS redundancy
Azure Premium File Shares offer consistent low-latency performance suitable for legacy applications requiring SMB access. LRS redundancy is cost-effective for a single-region deployment, making it the most balanced choice for the given requirements.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. Standard file shares offer higher latency and are not ideal for consistently low-latency needs.
- B. Azure NetApp Files offers extremely high performance but is significantly more expensive than Premium File Shares, making it overkill and not the 'most cost-effective' for a 'small, fixed set of files'.
- C. Azure Blob Storage does not natively provide SMB file system access, and building a custom driver would add significant complexity and cost, not meeting the direct SMB migration need.
Azure Premium File Shares
Azure Premium File Shares are SSD-backed file shares designed for high-performance, latency-sensitive workloads that require consistent throughput.
- Offers consistent low-latency performance.
- Supports SMB and NFS protocols.
- Backed by SSDs, higher cost than Standard shares.
- Ideal for databases, developer environments, and high-performance applications.
Memory trick: SMB needs: Standard for Budget, Premium for Speed, NetApp for Extreme.