Design Studio — Design semi-structured and unstructured data storage
AZ-305 › Unit 2 › Design semi-structured and unstructured data storage
Design Studio — Design semi-structured and unstructured data storage
This studio turns the topic into an architecture exercise. Produce a recommendation that another engineer could challenge, implement, and validate. There is no credit for a list of Azure products without flows, constraints, failure behaviour, and trade-offs.
Studio brief
- 2
- Design data storage solutions
- 4
- 45–60 minutes
Client brief
Fabrikam is modernising a production workload in this domain: Choose object, file, key-value, document, or analytical storage from access pattern and governance. The workload serves internal teams and external customers, carries regulated data, and must remain supportable by a small platform team. The client has supplied incomplete requirements; part of the exercise is to state assumptions and identify questions that would materially change the recommendation.
The initial requirements are:
- The design must address durable objects and archives with explicit assumptions and measurable acceptance evidence.
- The design must address shared file semantics with explicit assumptions and measurable acceptance evidence.
- The design must address globally distributed document data with explicit assumptions and measurable acceptance evidence.
- The design must address analytical lake with explicit assumptions and measurable acceptance evidence.
- The solution must use Microsoft Entra identities, private connectivity where justified, infrastructure as code, and observable health signals.
- The design must state a recovery path, operational owner, cost driver, and one deliberate compromise.
Candidate decision anchors
| Requirement thread | Candidate starting point | Qualification rule |
|---|---|---|
| Durable objects and archives | Azure Blob Storage | Choose tier, redundancy, lifecycle, immutability, and namespace |
| Shared file semantics | Azure Files or Azure NetApp Files | Match SMB/NFS, performance, identity, and enterprise features |
| Globally distributed document data | Azure Cosmos DB | Select partition key and consistency from measured access |
| Analytical lake | ADLS Gen2/OneLake | Govern zones, formats, catalogue, lineage, and small-file behaviour |
These are starting points, not an answer key. You may select a different service when a stated assumption or constraint justifies it. Every deviation must identify the requirement it serves and the new operational cost it introduces.
Studio workflow
Clarify
Write five questions whose answers could change the architecture. Mark hard constraints separately from preferences.
Required submission
- A one-page architecture diagram with a text equivalent.
- A decision record containing context, decision, alternatives, consequences, and validation evidence.
- A requirement-to-control matrix that maps every hard constraint to a component or operating process.
- A failure table covering component, zone, region, identity, network, and operator-error failures where applicable.
- Three validation tests: one functional, one reliability/security, and one operational or cost test.
Review traps
- A storage tier is not a redundancy option.
- A poor partition key cannot be fixed by adding regions.
- Replication does not protect against logical deletion by itself.
Assessment rubric
| Dimension | 0 — Missing | 1 — Partial | 2 — Release quality |
|---|---|---|---|
| Requirements | Products chosen before constraints | Some constraints mapped | Hard constraints, assumptions, and change-driving questions are explicit |
| Architecture | Component list | Main flow shown | Identity, traffic/data, dependencies, and failure boundaries are coherent |
| Trade-offs | No alternative | Alternative named | Strongest alternative rejected using a stated requirement |
| Operability | Monitoring mentioned | Some runbook detail | Health, capacity, deployment, recovery, ownership, and cost evidence defined |
| Currency | No sources | Secondary/undated source | Current Microsoft primary source linked and reviewed date recorded |
Reflection
- Which requirement eliminated the most attractive alternative?
- Which assumption creates the greatest residual risk?
- What would you test in a pilot before approving production deployment?
- How would the recommendation change if the operations team doubled in size or the recovery objective tightened?
Source and freshness
Grounded in the current AZ-305 skills outline and both attached course sources. Current service contracts must be verified in Microsoft Learn during the studio. Reviewed 2026-08-02.