Which Azure Storage Redundancy for Geo-Clustered Sites
Your company has a Microsoft Azure subscription. The company has datacenters in Los Angeles and New York. You are configuring the two datacenters as geo-clustered sites for site resiliency. You need to recommend an Azure storage redundancy option. You have the following data storage requirements: ✑ Data must be stored on multiple nodes. ✑ Data must be stored on nodes in separate geographic locations. ✑ Data can be read from the secondary location as well as from the primary location. Which of the following Azure stored redundancy options should you recommend?
Community Insight
The question tests whether you know that plain GRS keeps the secondary unreadable until Microsoft-initiated failover, while RA-GRS exposes the secondary for reads — the trap is rejecting option B over its wording.
This AZ-104 question tests Azure storage redundancy choices for a two-region, site-resilient design in Los Angeles and New York. It establishes that read access to a secondary region without waiting for a failover requires read-access geo-redundant storage (RA-GRS), option B.
Option A (geo-redundant storage) is the most common wrong pick: learners argue option B's label says "read-only" instead of "read-access," but GRS alone cannot satisfy the explicit requirement to read from the secondary location.
Community Discussion (85 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Option B maps to read-access geo-redundant storage (RA-GRS), which replicates data to a paired region — satisfying both the "multiple nodes" and "separate geographic locations" requirements for your Los Angeles and New York sites. Critically, RA-GRS also provides a read-only endpoint for the secondary, so applications can read from the secondary region whether or not Microsoft has initiated a failover. That third requirement is the deciding factor, because it goes beyond plain GRS.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
When a requirement mentions reading from a secondary location, immediately think RA-GRS (or RA-GZRS); plain GRS only becomes readable after a failover. Don't let a slightly-off option label derail the functional requirement analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why isn't plain geo-redundant storage (GRS) enough for these requirements?
GRS does replicate across geographic locations, but the secondary is inaccessible to users unless Microsoft performs a failover, so it fails the requirement to read from the secondary.
Isn't option B mislabeled as "read-only geo-redundant storage"?
The official product name is read-access geo-redundant storage (RA-GRS). Despite the wording quibble, B is the only option that delivers read access to the secondary region.
Related Analysis
Practice All AZ-104 Questions
Access 100 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full AZ-104 Practice Test →