Which of the following technologies was developed to allow companies to use less-expensive
storage while still maintaining the speed and redundancy required in a business environment?
A.
RAID
B.
Tape Backup
C.
Load Balancing
D.
Clustering
Get 50% Discount on All Your Purchases
at PrepAway.com - Latest Exam Questions
This is ONE TIME OFFER
50%
Clustering is more expensive than RAID.
RAID 5 & 6 provide high performance and redundancy with low cost.
0
0
Is this answer right? I would think it’s RAID
0
0
My first attempt is RAID, so I am wrong. I read the question twice, the hint is “in a business environment”, so the answer is Clustering.
0
0
@Lake – how do you know you got it wrong? I too think it’s RAID
0
0
I think implementing RAID is less expensive than clusters, and the key phrase for me is “less-expensive storage”.
0
0
Raided systems are used in a business environment. I am fairly certain that the answer is RAID. Also, I think it would be a mistake to consider clustering to be a storage activity. It is always better to consider that clustering is a shared processing environment. The data is shared but it is hard to figure out where that data is actually stored (could be on any of the clustered servers).
0
0
I believe it is clustering. While both RAID and Clustering provides a degree of redundancy, RAID by itself can support a business environment for a small business in which RAID is implemented on one server causing a single impact of failure when the server goes down (and it will), there goes the business. RAID implemented on several clustered servers maintains the speed and redundancy required in a business environment which is the key phrase of this question. My vote is clustering.
0
0
I would say it’s RAID as the question mentions “less-expensive
storage”. Clustering is whole servers whilst RAID deals with storage.
0
0
Which of the following technologies was developed to allow companies to use less-expensive storage while still maintaining the speed and redundancy required in a business environment?
I looked at this question over and over again, and inspite of what most sites say, I concur that the only answer has to be “A.RAID”
First of all, it is a process of elimination: B and C are out from the onset.
So it is a tossup between “A.RAID” and “D.Clustering”
As already pointed out, we need to meet x3 criteria:
We need a cheap form of storage
Whilst maintaining speed and
Redundancy
Now for some definitions:
RAID (Redundant Array of Independent Disks, originally Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks) is a data STORAGE (tick) virtualization technology that combines multiple physical disk drive components into one or more logical units for the purposes of DATA REDUNDANCY (tick) , PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT (tick) , or both.
So RAID does tick all the boxes
Clustering, in the context of databases, refers to the ability of several servers or instances to connect to a single database.
An instance is the collection of memory and processes that interacts with a database, which is the set of physical files that actually store data.
clustering offers two major advantages, especially in high-volume database environments:
FAULT TOLERANCE: because there is more than one server or instance for users to connect to, clustering offers an alternative, in the event of individual server failure.
LOAD BALANCING: the clustering feature is usually set up to allow users to be automatically allocated to the server with the least load.
So clustering does not tick all the boxes, and in addition to it, it is far more EXPENSIVE than RAID.
So: “A.RAID” it is.
0
0
Raid is less expensive and it is also used in a business environment. I dont know what redundant it wants. Ofcourse if service redundancy clustering could be the answer.
0
0