Microsoft AZ-104 Exam Dumps, Practice Test Questions

Job completion and usability of a selected restore are distinct. Corruption, missed application components or procedural gaps can remain undetected.

Soft delete helps protect backup data from accidental or malicious removal. It does not demonstrate that a specific file exists, is usable, or can be restored; perform a representative restore test.

More frequent successful jobs increase recovery points but do not prove the selected application file is present and recoverable. A safe trial restore is direct evidence.

Alerts can report backup events or missed jobs but cannot supply different recovery-point expiration requirements. Reusable backup policies with production and development retention configurations are needed; alerts are only monitoring around those policies.

A tag by itself does not change the backup schedule/retention applied by a policy. The protection assignment must use the appropriate policy settings.

Availability sets manage hardware fault and update domain placement rather than vault retention behavior.

Deleting backup data conflicts with the stated requirement to retain existing recovery points. A supported Standard-to-Enhanced migration keeps the protected item and history where prerequisites allow.

Daily retention determines how long points remain available; it does not convert Standard's once-daily scheduling into Enhanced's supported subdaily schedule. Changing retention alone therefore cannot meet the faster recovery point objective or extended snapshot-tier capability.

A Standard policy does not acquire Enhanced policy capabilities merely by editing its display/schedule settings. Use the supported migration flow and verify the workload requirements.

In-place restoration can overwrite or affect the failed production workload and does not provide the requested isolated testing environment. A new VM is safer for validation.

File-level restoration can recover selected files but does not replace the damaged OS and boot configuration the team needs to validate.

Azure Backup recovery points and Site Recovery replication are different services. A failover cannot use only the backup vault recovery point as its replication source.

A full VM restore is more disruptive than retrieving a single directory and can overwrite healthy current state. Narrow file recovery should be considered first.

A snapshot taken after the directory has already been deleted captures the current disk state, not the earlier deleted files. The valid historical Azure VM Backup recovery point is the relevant recovery source.

Azure VM Backup supports file recovery from appropriate recovery points, so restoring the entire VM is not necessary just to recover one directory. A full VM restore could overwrite healthy current state and is more disruptive than extracting the missing files.

Replacing production destroys the separation needed for investigation and risks losing current evidence. The scenario explicitly forbids rebooting or replacing it.

A snapshot created after the suspected compromise captures the current potentially tainted data, not the known earlier recovery point required for forensics. Restore separate managed disks from an eligible pre-incident Azure Backup point instead of re-labeling a new snapshot.

Site Recovery replicates workload state for disaster recovery and its latest replica is not automatically a clean pre-incident forensic backup. The requirement identifies a known earlier Azure Backup recovery point, which can be restored as separate disks without replacing the live VM.

File recovery is useful when an individual document or file must be recovered, but it does not reconstruct a complete VM with multiple NICs and an internal load balancer arrangement. The failure requires rebuilding compute and its specialized network connections. An isolated file restore would leave the core workload infrastructure absent.

Basic Create new VM recovery can produce a VM from a backup, but should not be relied on to reconstruct all stated special network layout elements automatically. This workload needs multiple NICs, a reserved private address and specific internal Load Balancer association; Microsoft points to Restore disks and template-based customization for those configurations.

Restored disks contain storage state, not instructions for the required multiple network interfaces or internal Load Balancer attachments. Attaching the disks to an unrelated VM also fails the scenario’s objective of reconstructing a correctly configured replacement workload. Restore disks can be the first step, but template and networking customization are still necessary.

Protection is tracked for individual backup items and does not automatically enroll all future clones of a machine.

Network addressing does not establish a protection relationship between the restored new VM and the Recovery Services vault policy.

Resource-group placement does not automatically enroll a newly created VM in the original protected item’s Backup policy. The restored VM has its own resource identity and must have backup protection explicitly configured or verified in the appropriate vault.

A control-plane lock applied after deletion cannot reconstruct a deleted container, and management locks are not reliable blob data-plane recovery mechanisms.

Operational Blob backup uses continuous change tracking, not a periodic schedule whose frequency could restore a deleted container.

Blob soft delete retains deleted blob objects, not the deleted container as an object. Container soft delete is a separate feature.

Azure VM selective disk backup always includes the VM OS disk; it is not an optional disk that can be excluded while retaining only data disks. A recovered data disk alone also does not provide the protected OS image for normal VM recovery.

A Recovery Services vault stores backups of included disks, not missing payload data for disks explicitly excluded from a recovery point. Excluding every disk would neither provide a supported VM backup nor allow the vault to regenerate discarded cache or production data.

VMSS repair operations restart, reimage or replace unhealthy instances; they are not recovery points for chosen disks. An automatic-repair policy cannot replace a selective Azure Backup disk-protection and retention design.

Availability sets spread VMs across update and fault domains for availability. They are not a control-plane substitute for subscription-level resource provider registration. Changing VM placement will not make Azure Recovery Services accept a destination subscription that is missing the provider.

A snapshot-only recovery point cannot replace the eligible vault-tier recovery point for a cross-subscription destination. Deleting backup history risks data protection and does nothing to register required service providers in the destination subscription.

Disabling the vault’s Cross Subscription Restore capability explicitly prevents the requested operation to another subscription. The problem is not an overly permissive setting but a missing subscription-level registration; disabling CSR would add a second blocker rather than resolve the provider error.