Is Local Redundant Storage (LRS) a Cost-Effective Solution for Data Redundancy in Azure Data Lake Storage?

Correct Answer: B

When you use geo-redundant storage, the data is copied to a secondary region as well.

Similarly, Read Access Geo-redundant storage also does the same, but in a cost-effective manner.

The limitation with this is that the data in the secondary region will be available only for reading,

So RA-GRS will be the right choice.

But LRS will have data in the primary region only.

So, in case of an outage, the data will not be accessible.

For more details on column store indexes, please refer to the following document.

The Local Redundant Storage (LRS) option in Azure Data Lake Storage provides redundancy by making three copies of the data within a single region. In this scenario, LRS would not solve the issue of data availability in case of a region-wide outage.

While LRS provides high durability within a region, it does not offer data redundancy across regions. Therefore, if the entire region where the data is stored goes through an outage, the data would not be available immediately in another region.

To ensure data redundancy across regions, geo-redundant storage (GRS) or read-access geo-redundant storage (RA-GRS) can be used. GRS provides redundancy by replicating the data to a secondary region, which is geographically distant from the primary region. In case of a region-wide outage, the data can be accessed immediately from the secondary region. RA-GRS provides the same redundancy as GRS, but also allows read access to the secondary region.

However, GRS and RA-GRS options come at a higher cost than LRS. Therefore, the choice of the storage redundancy option should be made based on the business requirements, budget, and acceptable recovery time objectives (RTO) and recovery point objectives (RPO).