Courseiva
← AZ-204
Full test
Question 623 of 997
Monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize Azure solutions →mediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

Quick Answer

The correct Kusto query is: `exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | join kind=inner requests on operation_Id | extend exceptionType = tostring(innermostType) | summarize Count=count() by exceptionType, url`. This query works because it first filters the `exceptions` table for the last 24 hours, then performs an inner join with the `requests` table on `operation_Id` to correlate each exception with its triggering URL, extracts the exception type from the `innermostType` field, and finally summarizes the count by both exceptionType and url. On the AZ-204 exam, this tests your ability to correlate telemetry across tables in Application Insights, a common scenario for monitoring distributed applications. A frequent trap is forgetting the join step—without it, you lose the URL context, which is explicitly required. Memory tip: think "Exceptions need Requests for the URL"—or simply "ERU" (Exceptions, Requests, URL).

AZ-204 Practice Question: Monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize Azure solutions

This AZ-204 practice question tests your understanding of monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize azure solutions. Read the scenario carefully and evaluate each option against the stated constraints before committing to an answer. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.

You are monitoring an e-commerce application with Application Insights. You need to analyze all exceptions that occurred in the last 24 hours, grouped by the exception type. You also need to include the URL where each exception was triggered and the number of times each type occurred. Which Log Analytics Kusto query should you use?

Question 1mediummultiple choice
Full question →

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

✓

exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | join kind=inner requests on operation_Id | extend exceptionType = tostring(innermostType) | summarize Count=count() by exceptionType, url

Option A is correct because it uses the `exceptions` table to filter exceptions from the last 24 hours, joins with the `requests` table on `operation_Id` to correlate each exception with the request URL, and then summarizes the count by exception type (extracted from `innermostType`) and URL. This meets all requirements: grouping by exception type, including the URL, and counting occurrences.

Key principle: Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

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

  • ✓

    exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | join kind=inner requests on operation_Id | extend exceptionType = tostring(innermostType) | summarize Count=count() by exceptionType, url

    Why this is correct

    This query joins the exceptions table with the requests table on operation_Id to get the URL (from requests table), then groups by exceptionType (innermostType) and url, counting occurrences.

    Related concept

    Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.

  • ✗

    exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | extend exceptionType = tostring(customDimensions.['ExceptionType']) | summarize Count=count() by exceptionType, url = tostring(customDimensions.['Url'])

    Why it's wrong here

    Exception data typically does not store URL in customDimensions by default. The URL is available in the requests table, not directly in exceptions. This approach is unreliable.

  • ✗

    requests | where timestamp > ago(24h) and success == false | extend exceptionType = tostring(resultCode) | summarize Count=count() by exceptionType, url

    Why it's wrong here

    This only covers failed requests (HTTP errors), not custom exceptions caught in code. It also uses resultCode as exceptionType, which is not accurate.

  • ✗

    exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | extend exceptionType = tostring(innermostType) | summarize Count=count() by exceptionType

    Why it's wrong here

    This returns the count per exceptionType but does not include the URL, which the requirement specifies.

Common exam traps

Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword

The trap here is that candidates might think exception details (like type and URL) are stored directly in the `exceptions` table, but the URL is only available via a join with the `requests` table, and the exception type is in `innermostType`, not custom dimensions.

Detailed technical explanation

How to think about this question

The `exceptions` table in Application Insights stores detailed exception data, including `innermostType` for the most specific exception type in a chain. Joining with the `requests` table on `operation_Id` is essential because the `exceptions` table does not directly contain the request URL; this correlation uses the distributed tracing ID to link telemetry items from the same operation. The `summarize` operator with `count()` then aggregates the grouped data, ensuring the output includes both the exception type and the URL.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
  • Find the constraint that changes the correct option.
  • Eliminate answers that are true in general but not in this case.

TExam Day Tips

  • Watch for words such as best, first, most likely and least administrative effort.
  • Review why wrong options are wrong, not only why the correct option is correct.

Key takeaway

Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.

Real-world example

How this comes up in practice

A cloud solutions architect for a retail company is evaluating services for a new workload. The correct answer here reflects best practice for the specific scenario described — not a general cloud recommendation. Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option. Cloud exam questions reward reading the constraint carefully: the same technology can be right or wrong depending on the use case.

What to study next

Got this wrong? Here's your next step.

Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.

Related practice questions

Related AZ-204 practice-question pages

Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.

Develop Azure compute solutions practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to Develop Azure compute solutions.

Develop for Azure storage practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to Develop for Azure storage.

Implement Azure security practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to Implement Azure security.

Connect to and consume Azure services and third-party services practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to Connect to and consume Azure services and third-party services.

Monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize Azure solutions practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to Monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize Azure solutions.

AZ-204 fundamentals practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to AZ-204 fundamentals.

AZ-204 scenario practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to AZ-204 scenario.

AZ-204 troubleshooting practice questions

Practise AZ-204 questions linked to AZ-204 troubleshooting.

Practice this exam

Start a free AZ-204 practice session

Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.

10 questions20 questions30 questions50 questionsTimed 30
AZ-204 practice-test guide →Study guide →Browse all practice tests

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

What does this AZ-204 question test?

Monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize Azure solutions — This question tests Monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize Azure solutions — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | join kind=inner requests on operation_Id | extend exceptionType = tostring(innermostType) | summarize Count=count() by exceptionType, url — Option A is correct because it uses the `exceptions` table to filter exceptions from the last 24 hours, joins with the `requests` table on `operation_Id` to correlate each exception with the request URL, and then summarizes the count by exception type (extracted from `innermostType`) and URL. This meets all requirements: grouping by exception type, including the URL, and counting occurrences.

What should I do if I get this AZ-204 question wrong?

Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.

What is the key concept behind this question?

Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.

About these practice questions

Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Same concept, more angles

1 more ways this is tested on AZ-204

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. You need to analyze all exceptions that occurred in the last 24 hours from an application monitored by Application Insights. You want to group them by exception type, and for each type show the URL where it occurred and the count. Which Log Analytics Kusto query should you use?

hard
  • A.exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | summarize count() by type, cloud_RoleInstance
  • ✓ B.exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | summarize count() by type, url
  • C.exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | summarize count() by type, operation_Name
  • D.exceptions | where timestamp > ago(24h) | summarize count() by type

Why B: Option B is correct because the query filters exceptions from the last 24 hours using `timestamp > ago(24h)`, groups them by `type` (exception type) and `url` (the URL where the exception occurred), and then counts occurrences per group with `summarize count()`. This directly matches the requirement to show, for each exception type, the URL and the count.

Last reviewed: Jun 11, 2026

Question Discussion

Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.

This AZ-204 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-204 exam.