BlackFriday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

IBM Exam C1000-085 Topic 10 Question 72 Discussion

Actual exam question for IBM's C1000-085 exam
Question #: 72
Topic #: 10
[All C1000-085 Questions]

Which statement regarding drive failure is true?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Dana at Sep 14, 2024, 02:20 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium C1000-085 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Han
25 days ago
Haha, I love these drive failure questions. They're like the database equivalent of 'If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, does it make a sound?' Anyway, I think C is the right answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laurel
26 days ago
Oh, come on! This is a no-brainer. It's obviously C. You can't just keep running queries and transactions if a drive goes down. That's just asking for data loss and system instability.
upvoted 0 times
Eladia
4 days ago
User 2: I see, that makes sense. So, it's important to have data distributed across multiple drives to prevent interruptions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dortha
12 days ago
Actually, the correct answer is A. Queries and transactions are not interrupted by drive failure if their data is not on the failed drive.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Miles
1 months ago
Hmm, I'm not so sure. I'd go with D. The existing queries and transactions might finish, but new ones would be blocked until the drive is replaced. Seems like the most logical scenario.
upvoted 0 times
Lynelle
5 days ago
User3: I agree with User2, D seems like the most logical scenario in case of drive failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kanisha
9 days ago
I disagree, I believe D is the correct statement. Running queries and transactions will finish, but new transactions will not be allowed till drive is changed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sylvia
10 days ago
I think A is the correct statement. Queries and transactions are not interrupted by drive failure if their data is not on the failed drive.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Julio
1 months ago
But if there is no drive mirroring, wouldn't queries be interrupted?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ria
1 months ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Devora
1 months ago
I think B is the right choice. Queries and transactions should not be interrupted in the event of a drive failure. The system should be able to handle that seamlessly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julio
2 months ago
I think the correct answer is A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Quentin
2 months ago
Option C seems to be the correct answer. Queries and transactions would definitely be interrupted if a drive fails, as there is no drive mirroring to ensure data redundancy.
upvoted 0 times
Margot
28 days ago
So, we need to ensure data redundancy to avoid interruptions in case of drive failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alise
1 months ago
I agree. Without drive mirroring, there is no redundancy to prevent interruption.
upvoted 0 times
...
Allene
1 months ago
I think option C is correct. Queries and transactions would be interrupted by drive failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel