Q: 5
You have a project in Azure DevOps named Project1. Project1 contains a build pipeline named Pipe1
that builds an application namedAppl.
You have an agent pool named Pool1 that contains a Windows Server 2019-based self-hosted agent.
Pipe1 uses Pool1.
You plan to implement another project named Project2. Project2 will have a build pipeline named
Pipe2 that builds an application namedApp2.
App1 and App2 have conflicting dependencies.
You need to minimize the possibility that the two build pipelines will conflict with each other. The
solution must minimize infrastructure costs.
What should you do?
Options
Discussion
Option A. not C. Adding another agent would cost more, trap option if you aren't careful.
A. Container jobs isolate dependencies on one agent, so no extra infra needed. Pretty sure that's the cheapest fix here.
A B is a distraction since switching OS doesn’t solve conflicting dependencies. Container jobs keep builds isolated on same agent and are cheaper than adding more agents.
Its A, official docs stress container jobs for isolation without extra infra. Seen similar on practice exams.
Has anyone checked the official docs or tried labs for container jobs in Azure DevOps for this scenario?
A imo, saw something super similar in a practice test. Container jobs give isolation without any extra cost.
I don't think it's C here. Having two agents would isolate, but the question wants to minimize cost. A (container jobs) lets you use one agent and keep dependencies separate. Anyone pick C for a different reason?
A tbh
Its A since container jobs let you isolate dependencies without extra agents, so cheaper overall. I think that's what the question's after but let me know if you see it different.
Not C, definitely A in this scenario. Adding another agent (C) bumps up costs, which the question wants to avoid. Container jobs (A) let both pipelines run isolated on one agent. Saw a similar trick on some practice sets.
Be respectful. No spam.
Question 5 of 35