You have a Microsoft Azure virtual machine named SQL1 that has Microsoft SQL Server 2016 installed. SQL1 has a critical database that contains online transaction data. The database is 700 GB. You…

Question

Options

• AModify the backup solution to use differential database backups.
• BPartition the tables in the database, and then modify the backup solution to use incremental
• CCreate multiple filegroups in the database, and then modify the backup solution to use filegroup
• DModify the backup solution to use transaction log backups.

• A
  8% (2)
• B
  13% (3)
• C
  75% (18)
• D
  4% (1)

Explanation

Explanation

Using multiple filegroups allows you to split a 700 GB database across separate physical storage units, and filegroup backups let you restore only the specific filegroup(s) needed rather than the entire 700 GB database at once - dramatically reducing restore time by parallelizing I/O and enabling partial restores. Option A (differential backups) reduces backup time by only capturing changes since the last full backup, but restore time is not significantly reduced since you still need the full backup plus the differential applied sequentially. Option B (incremental backups with partitioned tables) is not a native SQL Server backup concept - SQL Server does not support "incremental" backups in the traditional sense, making this option technically invalid. Option D (transaction log backups) shortens the recovery point objective and reduces data loss, but actually increases restore complexity since you must restore the full backup and then apply multiple log files in sequence.

Memory Tip: Think "Filegroups = Divide and Conquer" - by splitting the database into filegroups, you can restore only the pieces you need, just like replacing individual chapters of a book rather than reprinting the entire thing.

No community discussion yet for this question.