Which TWO of the following are valid reasons to use Azure Table Storage instead of Azure Cosmos DB?
Azure Table Storage offers a very straightforward and simple REST API, making it easy to integrate for basic key-value storage needs. A significant advantage is that it operates on a pay-as-you-go model for storage and transactions, completely eliminating the need for users to provision and manage throughput (Request Units), which simplifies operational overhead and cost management for many applications.
Why this answer
Azure Table Storage offers a simpler REST API based on OData and does not require explicit throughput provisioning (RU/s). In contrast, Azure Cosmos DB requires you to configure request units per second for each container, which adds operational complexity. For simple key-value workloads, Table Storage's pay-per-query model with no reserved capacity is more straightforward.
Exam trap
The trap here is that candidates assume 'simpler' always means 'better performance,' but Azure Table Storage's simplicity comes at the cost of limited indexing and throughput, making it unsuitable for low-latency or complex query scenarios.