Which advanced feature should be considered when integrating PowerProtect Data Manager with Kubernetes for stateful applications?

Question

Options

• APod auto-scaling
• BPersistent Volume Claims (PVCs)
• CNetwork policy enforcement
• DContainer runtime selection

• A
  7% (3)
• B
  73% (30)
• C
  15% (6)
• D
  5% (2)

Explanation

Persistent Volume Claims (PVCs) are the critical integration point because stateful applications require data that outlives individual pod lifecycles - PVCs are exactly how Kubernetes abstracts and requests durable storage, making them the natural target for PowerProtect Data Manager to discover, snapshot, and recover application data. Without integrating at the PVC layer, backup operations would miss the persistent data entirely.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (Pod auto-scaling): Scaling affects compute capacity, not data persistence or protection - it's irrelevant to backup integration.
• C (Network policy enforcement): Network policies govern traffic flow between pods; they don't affect how storage is backed up or restored.
• D (Container runtime selection): The runtime (containerd, CRI-O, etc.) handles container execution, not storage management - PowerProtect doesn't integrate at this layer.

Memory tip: Think "stateful = state must be saved" - the only Kubernetes construct here that actually holds state is the PVC. If it stores data, it needs protection; if it needs protection, you target PVCs.

No community discussion yet for this question.