Courseiva
Implement and Manage StoragemediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

AZ-104 Implement and Manage Storage Practice Question

A Windows VM and a Linux VM in Azure must use the same shared working folder for application files. The team does not want to run a separate file server, and both VMs must be able to mount the share by using native operating system tools. What should the administrator deploy?

⚠ Common exam trap

A common mix-up: candidates confuse Azure Blob storage (object storage) with Azure Files (file shares) and assume Blob can be mounted locally, or they may incorrectly think a managed disk can be attached to multiple VMs simultaneously without understanding the limitations of shared disk attachments.

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

An Azure Files share mounted from Windows by using SMB and from Linux by using SMB or the Azure Files mount command

Azure Files provides fully managed SMB (Server Message Block) file shares that can be mounted natively from both Windows (using SMB) and Linux (using SMB or the dedicated Azure Files mount command). This meets the requirement of a shared working folder without needing a separate file server, and both operating systems can use their native tools to access the share.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • An Azure Blob container mounted as a local NTFS volume on both VMs

    Why it's wrong here

    Azure Blob storage is a flat object store, not a block or volume device; it does not expose an NTFS-resembling file system that both Windows and Linux can natively mount. Although BlobFuse and NFS 3.0 support can project blobs as folders, neither provides a true NTFS volume, and concurrent read-write lock and permission semantics differ from the normal Windows or Linux file-system model. Therefore, attaching both VMs to the same Blob container as a shared NTFS volume is not possible for standard file operations.

    When this WOULD be correct

    An administrator needs to store large amounts of unstructured data (e.g., images, videos) accessible via HTTP/HTTPS from multiple VMs, and the VMs can use Azure Blob storage SDKs or REST APIs to access the data, not requiring native OS mounting.

  • An Azure Files share mounted from Windows by using SMB and from Linux by using SMB or the Azure Files mount command

    Why this is correct

    Azure Files is designed for shared file access from both Windows and Linux. It provides a managed file share that can be mounted with native tools, avoiding the need to operate a separate file server. This matches the requirement for a common working folder accessible from both operating systems.

  • A managed disk attached to both VMs in read-write mode

    Why it's wrong here

    A standard Azure managed disk is a block-level LUN that can be attached to only one VM at a time; attaching it to a second VM in read-write mode is unsupported unless you use Azure Shared Disks with SCSI Persistent Reservations and a cluster-aware file system. Even when shared disks are enabled, both VMs must run a clustered file system or a file share role over a protocol like SMB, and raw NTFS or ext4 is not safe to mount read-write on two independent servers. Thus a managed disk by itself does not provide the required cross-OS shared file access.

    When this WOULD be correct

    An administrator needs to attach a single data disk to multiple VMs for a clustered application (e.g., SQL Server FCI) using SCSI-3 Persistent Reservations, and the VMs are part of a Windows Server Failover Cluster or similar cluster that manages concurrent access.

  • An Azure Queue storage account with application-level file synchronization

    Why it's wrong here

    Azure Queue storage is a message broker that stores short-lived, decoupled messages (a single message can be up to 64 KB) and is intended for asynchronous workflow orchestration, not for presenting a shared file-system namespace. An application-level file synchronization layer would have to manually handle file metadata, chunking, conflict resolution, and ordering, and queues offer no locking, file consistency, or mountable interface. This is not a shared storage mount and cannot serve as a common working folder accessible through normal file-system APIs on both VMs.

    When this WOULD be correct

    An administrator needs to decouple application components for asynchronous processing, such as a web app sending tasks to a backend worker. Azure Queue storage would be correct for storing messages that trigger processing, not for shared file 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.

An Azure Files share mounted from Windows by using SMB and from Linux by using SMB or the Azure Files mount commandCorrect answer

Why this is correct

Azure Files is designed for shared file access from both Windows and Linux. It provides a managed file share that can be mounted with native tools, avoiding the need to operate a separate file server. This matches the requirement for a common working folder accessible from both operating systems.

An Azure Blob container mounted as a local NTFS volume on both VMsWrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Azure Blob containers cannot be mounted as a local NTFS volume natively; they require third-party tools or custom applications, and Windows does not support mounting Blob storage as an NTFS volume without additional software.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

An administrator needs to store large amounts of unstructured data (e.g., images, videos) accessible via HTTP/HTTPS from multiple VMs, and the VMs can use Azure Blob storage SDKs or REST APIs to access the data, not requiring native OS mounting.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may confuse Azure Blob storage with Azure Files, thinking both can be mounted as drives, or they may assume that any Azure storage can be mounted natively on both Windows and Linux.

A managed disk attached to both VMs in read-write modeWrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

A managed disk cannot be attached to multiple VMs in read-write mode simultaneously; Azure managed disks support shared attachments only with specific configurations (e.g., shared disks) that require cluster-aware file systems, not native OS tools for simple file sharing.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

An administrator needs to attach a single data disk to multiple VMs for a clustered application (e.g., SQL Server FCI) using SCSI-3 Persistent Reservations, and the VMs are part of a Windows Server Failover Cluster or similar cluster that manages concurrent access.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may think a managed disk can be shared like a network drive, overlooking Azure's limitation that a disk can only be attached to one VM at a time unless using specialized shared disk features with cluster coordination.

An Azure Queue storage account with application-level file synchronizationWrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Azure Queue storage is a messaging service for asynchronous communication, not a file-sharing solution. It cannot be mounted as a shared working folder using native OS tools, and it lacks file system semantics required for concurrent read/write access.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

An administrator needs to decouple application components for asynchronous processing, such as a web app sending tasks to a backend worker. Azure Queue storage would be correct for storing messages that trigger processing, not for shared file access.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may confuse Azure Queue storage with a general-purpose storage service, assuming it can store and synchronize files, or they might think 'file synchronization' implies a shared folder capability.

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?”

About these practice questions

Courseiva writes every AZ-104 question from scratch — 1,049 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Same concept, more angles

1 more way this is tested on AZ-104

These questions test the same concept from different angles. Work through them to make sure you can recognise it however the exam phrases it.

Variation 1. A team wants one Azure Files share to be used by both Windows and Linux virtual machines. Which two mounting approaches are valid? Select two.

easy
  • A.Map the share on Windows by using the built-in SMB client.
  • B.Mount the share on Linux by using an SMB/CIFS client such as mount.cifs.
  • C.Mount the share on Linux by using the Azure Blob service endpoint.
  • D.Use an Azure VPN gateway to make the file share mount possible.
  • E.Use an Azure load balancer to present the share to both VMs.

Why A: Windows includes a built-in SMB client that can directly map an Azure Files share using its UNC path (e.g., \\storageaccount.file.core.windows.net\sharename). This leverages the SMB 3.0 protocol, which Azure Files supports over the public internet with encryption, requiring no additional gateway or VPN.

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.