Which scenario justifies using FlexCache instead of SnapMirror?

Which scenario justifies using FlexCache instead of SnapMirror?

• A. A DR site that requires a full, read-write copy of the dataset for failover.
• B. A remote office that only needs read access to shared engineering data and wants lower latency.
• C. A compliance environment requiring point-in-time consistent replicas.
• D. A site requiring asynchronous updates for backup purposes.

Answer: (B)

FlexCache is used to bring fast, local read access to data that actually resides at a remote origin, by caching the data at the remote site. This means clients at the remote location can read engineering data quickly without requiring a full duplicate of the dataset at that site. In this scenario, the remote office only needs read access and wants lower latency, so caching data locally delivers the performance gain while keeping the master copy on the origin cluster. SnapMirror, on the other hand, creates and maintains a full replica at the remote site to support disaster recovery and potential local failover, including asynchronous or synchronous updates. That approach is more bandwidth-intensive and is overkill if the goal is simply faster reads from a cache rather than having a complete local copy. So, for a remote office that only needs read access and seeks lower latency, FlexCache provides the right balance of performance and efficiency, whereas SnapMirror is geared toward broader DR/failover requirements.

FlexCache is used to bring fast, local read access to data that actually resides at a remote origin, by caching the data at the remote site. This means clients at the remote location can read engineering data quickly without requiring a full duplicate of the dataset at that site. In this scenario, the remote office only needs read access and wants lower latency, so caching data locally delivers the performance gain while keeping the master copy on the origin cluster.

SnapMirror, on the other hand, creates and maintains a full replica at the remote site to support disaster recovery and potential local failover, including asynchronous or synchronous updates. That approach is more bandwidth-intensive and is overkill if the goal is simply faster reads from a cache rather than having a complete local copy.

So, for a remote office that only needs read access and seeks lower latency, FlexCache provides the right balance of performance and efficiency, whereas SnapMirror is geared toward broader DR/failover requirements.