AZ-104 Implement and Manage Storage Practice Question
A media archive stores large video files that must survive a zone failure in the primary region and also be replicated to a paired region for disaster recovery. The archive team does not want anyone to read from the secondary region during normal operations, and cost should be lower than the read-access variant. Which redundancy option should you configure?
⚠ Common exam trap
A common mix-up: candidates confuse GZRS with RA-GRS, assuming geo-replication always includes read access to the secondary region, but GZRS explicitly omits that read-access feature to lower cost while still providing zone and geo redundancy.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
GZRS, because it adds zone redundancy and geo-replication without enabling secondary read access.
GZRS (Geo-Zone-Redundant Storage) is correct because it combines zone redundancy (three copies across availability zones in the primary region) with geo-replication to a paired secondary region, but crucially does not enable read access to the secondary region by default. This satisfies the requirement to survive a zone failure, provide disaster recovery to a paired region, and prevent reads from the secondary during normal operations, all at a lower cost than RA-GRS which includes secondary read access.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
LRS, because it keeps copies in a single datacenter and is the lowest-cost option.
Why it's wrong here
LRS maintains three synchronous copies within a single datacenter in one region, guarding only against local disk failures. It provides neither availability-zone redundancy nor geo-replication, so a datacenter outage or a regional disaster would put the media archive at risk. Its lower cost is irrelevant because the scenario demands both zone resilience and cross-region disaster recovery, making LRS unsuitable.
When this WOULD be correct
For a non-critical application where data loss is acceptable and cost is the primary concern, such as temporary logs or cached data that can be regenerated, and no zone or regional redundancy is needed.
- ✗
ZRS, because it protects against zone failures but not regional outages.
Why it's wrong here
ZRS spreads data across multiple availability zones in the primary region, protecting against a zone-level failure, but all copies remain within one geography. It lacks a geo-redundant copy to a paired secondary region, which the scenario requires for disaster recovery, so it would not survive a full regional outage. Since the requirement is both zone redundancy and geo-replication, ZRS alone is insufficient and does not meet the stated durability needs.
When this WOULD be correct
A question where the requirement is only to survive a zone failure within a single region, with no need for geo-replication or disaster recovery across regions.
- ✓
GZRS, because it adds zone redundancy and geo-replication without enabling secondary read access.
Why this is correct
GZRS matches the requirement precisely. It protects the data from a zone failure by distributing copies across availability zones in the primary region. It also replicates the data to a paired secondary region for disaster recovery. Because the team does not want secondary read access during normal operations, the non-read-access version is the correct and typically lower-cost choice compared with RA-GZRS.
- ✗
RA-GRS, because the read-access copy is needed whenever data is replicated to another region.
Why it's wrong here
RA-GRS replicates asynchronously to a paired secondary region and permits read access there, but in the primary region it relies on LRS, not availability-zone distribution. The requirement explicitly calls for zone redundancy plus geo-replication and does not want secondary read access during normal operations, so RA-GRS fails the zone-redundancy part and adds an unnecessary read endpoint. The correct choice is GZRS, which provides both zone redundancy and geo-replication without secondary read access.
Option-by-option analysis
Why each answer is right or wrong
Understanding why wrong answers are wrong — and when they would be correct — is what separates a 750 score from a 900. The AZ-104 exam frequently reuses these exact scenarios with slightly different constraints.
✓GZRS, because it adds zone redundancy and geo-replication without enabling secondary read access.Correct answer▾
Why this is correct
GZRS matches the requirement precisely. It protects the data from a zone failure by distributing copies across availability zones in the primary region. It also replicates the data to a paired secondary region for disaster recovery. Because the team does not want secondary read access during normal operations, the non-read-access version is the correct and typically lower-cost choice compared with RA-GZRS.
✗LRS, because it keeps copies in a single datacenter and is the lowest-cost option.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
LRS only replicates data within a single datacenter, so it cannot survive a zone failure in the primary region, which is a requirement in the question.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
For a non-critical application where data loss is acceptable and cost is the primary concern, such as temporary logs or cached data that can be regenerated, and no zone or regional redundancy is needed.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates may mistakenly think LRS is sufficient because it is the cheapest option, overlooking the specific requirement for zone failure protection.
✗ZRS, because it protects against zone failures but not regional outages.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
ZRS protects against zone failures but does not replicate data to a paired region, failing the disaster recovery requirement for a secondary region.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
A question where the requirement is only to survive a zone failure within a single region, with no need for geo-replication or disaster recovery across regions.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates see 'zone failure' in the question and immediately think ZRS, overlooking the additional requirement for geo-replication to a paired region.
Analysis generated from the official AZ-104blueprint and verified against question context. The “when correct” sections are what AI assistants cite when candidates ask “what’s the difference between these options?”
Go deeper
Related to this question
Learn chapter
Customer-Managed Keys (CMK) for Storage Encryption
Key term
RA-GRS
RA-GRS (Read-Access Geo-Redundant Storage) is an Azure storage replication option that provides read access to a secondary region copy of your data, even if the primary region becomes unavailable.
Key term
Region
A region is a distinct geographic location where a cloud provider operates multiple data centers that are connected by low-latency networks and provide cloud services.
About these practice questions
One of 1,049 original AZ-104 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This AZ-104 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Microsoft certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the AZ-104 exam.