QRadar's solution to the 'Accumulator is falling behind' issue? Throw a tarp over the problem and hope no one notices. It's the IT equivalent of putting a sock on the doorknob.
D is the answer. Time-series graphs and reports omitting columns? Sounds like a clever way for QRadar to hide its shortcomings from the user. Classic IT move!
I'm going with C. The 'Accumulator is falling behind' warning means the events are being stored, not processed in real-time. That's the only way to explain the warning message.
I'm with you on this one, C seems to make the most sense. The events are categorized as stored when the 'Accumulator is falling behind' warning occurs.
B has to be the right answer. Automatically dropping the incoming events and flows is the only way QRadar can prevent the system from falling further behind. Aggregating data sounds too complicated.
I think the correct answer is A. QRadar tries to aggregate the events and flows during the next 60 seconds to catch up with the backlog. That seems like the most reasonable approach to handling the 'Accumulator is falling behind' warning.
Rasheeda
2 months agoEmeline
2 months agoTrinidad
17 days agoBrunilda
20 days agoBilly
27 days agoVanna
1 months agoRosamond
1 months agoDion
2 months agoChantell
2 months agoBernardo
25 days agoEun
1 months agoWilliam
1 months agoFrancine
2 months agoPhuong
2 months agoAsuncion
2 months agoDonte
2 months agoRory
3 months agoStefany
3 months agoVirgina
3 months ago