Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. >
  3. Azure
  4. >
  5. AZ-104
  6. >
  7. This article

Azure AZ-104 Drill: Availability Sets vs. Zones - Designing Highly Available Virtual Machines

Jeff Taakey
Author
Jeff Taakey
21+ Year Enterprise Architect | Multi-Cloud Architect & Strategist.
Jeff's Architecture Insights
Go beyond static exam dumps. Jeff’s Insights is engineered to cultivate the mindset of a Production-Ready Architect. We move past ‘correct answers’ to dissect the strategic trade-offs and multi-cloud patterns required to balance reliability, security, and TCO in mission-critical environments.

While preparing for the AZ-104 exam, many candidates struggle with VM availability design decisions. In the enterprise world, this decision often hinges on meeting SLAs for uptime while optimizing cost and operational complexity. Let’s drill into a simulated migration scenario.

The Scenario
#

Fabrikam Financial Services is modernizing their core web application infrastructure. The company plans to deploy three Azure virtual machines—named FIN-VM1, FIN-VM2, and FIN-VM3—to host their customer-facing web application, WebFinApp. Their goal is to achieve high availability so that if a single Azure datacenter (or physical failure domain) becomes unavailable, at least two VMs hosting WebFinApp remain operational.

Currently, the IT team is evaluating how to place these VMs within Azure to meet this availability SLA while adhering to company governance policies that require minimizing cross-region data egress fees and complying with regulatory data residency guidelines.

Key Requirements
#

Ensure at least two out of three VMs remain available if a single Azure Availability Zone or data center failure occurs. The deployment must avoid putting all VMs into a single failure boundary.

The Options
#

  • A) Deploy all three VMs into a single Azure Availability Zone within one region.
  • B) Deploy all three VMs into a single Azure Availability Set within the same datacenter.
  • C) Deploy each VM into a separate Azure Availability Zone across the region.
  • D) Deploy each VM into a separate Azure Availability Set within the same region.

Correct Answer
#

C) Deploy each VM into a separate Azure Availability Zone across the region.


The Architect’s Analysis
#

Correct Answer
#

Option C: Each VM deployed into a separate Azure Availability Zone within the same region.

Step-by-Step Winning Logic
#

Azure Availability Zones represent physically separate datacenters within an Azure region. By dispersing FIN-VM1, FIN-VM2, and FIN-VM3 into separate zones, Fabrikam Financial Services mitigates single physical site failures causing outage. This design supports the Reliability pillar of the Microsoft Well-Architected Framework (WAF). Operational Excellence is maintained because Azure manages zone isolation without heavy operational overhead.

  • Availability Zones provide a 99.99% SLA for VMs.
  • They reduce risk from datacenter-level failures, while adhering to regional data residency.
  • Cost: Minimal extra cost, mostly related to inter-zone communication traffic which is billed modestly.

The Traps (Distractor Analysis)
#

  • Option A (All VMs in single Availability Zone):
    Leaves all VMs reliant on one datacenter failure domain. If that zone goes down, all VMs are unavailable—failing the requirement.

  • Option B (All VMs in one Availability Set):
    Availability Sets only protect from hardware and rack failures within the same datacenter but do not protect from zone or datacenter outages. A full datacenter failure would cause complete outage.

  • Option D (Each VM in separate Availability Sets):
    Availability Sets are not designed to span zones or datacenters; they group VMs within one datacenter. Having multiple sets in the same datacenter doesn’t protect from physical site failures.

The Architect Blueprint
#

Mermaid Diagram illustrating the correct spread of VMs across Availability Zones within the same region.

graph TD User([User]) --> AzureFW[Azure Front Door] AzureFW --> VM1[FIN-VM1 - Zone 1] AzureFW --> VM2[FIN-VM2 - Zone 2] AzureFW --> VM3[FIN-VM3 - Zone 3] style AzureFW fill:#0078D4,stroke:#333,color:#fff style VM1 fill:#5C2D91,stroke:#333,color:#fff style VM2 fill:#5C2D91,stroke:#333,color:#fff style VM3 fill:#5C2D91,stroke:#333,color:#fff

Diagram Note:
User traffic is load-balanced across three VMs, each hosted in a distinct Availability Zone, ensuring zone-level fault tolerance.

The Decision Matrix
#

Option Est. Complexity Est. Monthly Cost Pros Cons
A Low Low Simple to manage, no cross-zone latency Single zone failure impacts all VMs
B Low Low Protects against rack/hardware failure No protection from zone/datacenter outage
C Medium Medium Zone-level high availability (99.99% SLA); meets compliance Slightly higher inter-zone data costs; more complex than sets
D Medium Medium Some fault domain benefits within datacenter No cross-zone protection; complex management

Cost notes: Basic VM charges apply equally in all cases; costs rise slightly with cross-zone traffic (Option C). Availability Zones require region-specific support.

Real-World Practitioner Insight
#

Exam Rule
#

For the exam, always pick Availability Zones when you see the requirement “VMs must tolerate a datacenter or zone failure inside a single region.”

Real World
#

In reality, many enterprises start with Availability Sets during pilot phases. As applications mature and business criticality rises, they migrate workloads into Availability Zones to meet stricter reliability SLAs, improve operational agility, and support the Microsoft CAF governance pillar for business continuity.

The DevPro Network: Mission and Founder

A 21-Year Tech Leadership Journey

Jeff Taakey has driven complex systems for over two decades, serving in pivotal roles as an Architect, Technical Director, and startup Co-founder/CTO.

He holds both an MBA degree and a Computer Science Master's degree from an English-speaking university in Hong Kong. His expertise is further backed by multiple international certifications including TOGAF, PMP, ITIL, and AWS SAA.

His experience spans diverse sectors and includes leading large, multidisciplinary teams (up to 86 people). He has also served as a Development Team Lead while cooperating with global teams spanning North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific. He has spearheaded the design of an industry cloud platform. This work was often conducted within global Fortune 500 environments like IBM, Citi and Panasonic.

Following a recent Master’s degree from an English-speaking university in Hong Kong, he launched this platform to share advanced, practical technical knowledge with the global developer community.


About This Site: CertDevPro.com

CertDevPro.com is the flagship hub of Stonehenge Digital Education. We bridge the gap between passing exams and leading high-stakes enterprise projects. Curated by 21-year industry veteran Jeff Taakey, this platform provides strategic blueprints across AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud to solve core business and technical pain points for architects worldwide.


Disclaimer: This is a study note based on simulated scenarios for the GCP ACE exam. It is not an official question from Google Cloud.