Database server slow on access switch: move to core switch?
Users report that a database server responds slowly or drops connections to other servers at random during busy times. A technician notices the database and servers are connected to an access switch in the office. Which of the following should the technician do to improve the performance of the database server?
Community Votes
50% of anonymous learners picked answer D. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
The exam tests your understanding of access vs core switch roles and oversubscription; the common trap is choosing LACP when the real issue is server placement on the congested access layer.
The question tests where to place high-traffic servers for optimal performance. The community is split, but the correct answer is D: move the server connection from the access switch to the core switch to avoid oversubscribed access-layer bandwidth.
B. Implement LACP on the connection to the database server is the most common mistake because it seems to increase bandwidth, but it does not address the underlying bottleneck caused by the server being on an access switch with limited uplink capacity.
Community Discussion (7 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
D is correct because database servers and other high-availability servers should be connected to the core switch, not an access switch. Access switches are designed for end-user connectivity and have oversubscribed uplinks to the core, which can cause latency, drops, and slow performance during busy periods. Moving the server to the core switch places it closer to the network backbone, reducing the number of hops and eliminating the access-layer bottleneck. Community comments supporting D correctly note that moving a server to the core switch is a best practice for server traffic, while LACP only helps if the bottleneck is the single link itself.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
A. Using different ports on the access switch does not increase uplink bandwidth or solve oversubscription; it only changes physical ports on the same congested switch. B. LACP can combine multiple links into one logical link, but the server would still be on the access switch, and the access switch's uplink to the core remains the bottleneck. C. Moving user connections to the same switch as the database server would actually make congestion worse, because user traffic and server traffic would compete for the same limited access-layer resources.Community Comment Notes
Several commenters advocate B, arguing that moving a server to the core switch is "bad practice" or "pointless." However, those comments miss the distinction between physical placement and logical network design: core switches are built for high-throughput, low-latency traffic, and hosting servers on the core is a valid and common design. One commenter notes that a DBA would first check CPU, RAM, or indexes, but that is outside the scope of this network exam. The tie in votes reflects a common misconception; the exam expects you to focus on network design principles, not server tuning.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
When choosing between server placement and link aggregation, remember that access switches are for end users and have limited uplink capacity. If a server is on an access switch, the first improvement is to relocate it to the core or distribution switch, not to add more links to the same congested access layer.