What is the risk of setting static alert thresholds without reviewing the service's actual behaviour?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Set it too tight and it screams; too loose and it never speaks. Either way you learn nothing, and both look like a working alert on the configuration page.
Full Explanation
The correct answer is that a threshold unrelated to the service's normal range will either fire constantly or never fire, and in both cases it fails to indicate real trouble. A threshold is only meaningful relative to what the service normally does. Chosen without that reference it lands either inside the normal range, producing continuous noise, or far outside it, staying silent through genuine incidents. The claim that static thresholds are unsupported and must be replaced with baselines is incorrect because static thresholds are supported and appropriate where a firm requirement such as a service-level objective target exists. The claim that static thresholds prevent service discovery is incorrect because alert configuration has no bearing on service discovery. The claim that static thresholds automatically adjust themselves is incorrect because static thresholds are fixed; adaptive alerting adjusts. For the exam, tie threshold selection to observed behaviour and review as behaviour changes.