C_DBADM_2601試験の受験料は決して安くなく、再受験となれば費用も時間も二重にかかります。2026年の試験に一度で臨むために、CertJukenの217問の練習問題で万全の準備を整えませんか。

SAP C_DBADM_2601 試験概要:

認定ベンダー:	SAP
試験名:	SAP認定 - データベース管理者 - SAP HANA
試験番号:	C_DBADM_2601
関連資格:	SAP認定テクノロジーアソシエイト - SAP HANA Cloud プロビジョニングおよび管理
認定の有効期間:	5年間
合格点:	73%
試験時間:	180 分
試験形式:	システムベース評価, シナリオ設問式, 多肢選択式
出題数:	80
受験料:	578米ドル
対応言語:	English
推奨トレーニング:	SAP HANA Cloud におけるデータベースのプロビジョニングおよび管理 HA200 - SAP HANA のインストールおよび管理
受験申し込み:	SAP Certification Hub SAP Learning Hub
サンプル問題:
受験方法:	オンライン監督付き受験、またはSAP認定試験会場での受験
前提条件:	データベース管理の基礎知識およびSAP HANAの基本事項に関する知識を有すること。受験に必須の前提資格試験は設けられていません
公式シラバスのURL:	https://learning.sap.com/certifications/sap-certified-associate-database-administrator-sap-hana

SAP C_DBADM_2601 試験シラバストピック:

C_DBADM_2601試験で受験者がよく抱く疑問

SAP Certified - Database Administrator - SAP HANA 認定 C_DBADM_2601 試験問題：

問題 #1

A regional furniture manufacturer uses SAP HANA for production-demand analytics. SAP HANA cockpit shows the database as available, but the operations dashboard displays a short CPU spike during the planning run while the workload log shows a longer query wait interval. Users reported slow report refreshes at the same time. A coordinator suggests raising the CPU alert threshold because the spike was brief.
The constraint is that the administrator must determine whether the user delay is related to workload wait behavior before changing monitoring thresholds. The next planning run must remain observable with evidence that can support troubleshooting.
Which action best supports the troubleshooting decision?

A. Ignore the workload wait interval because SAP HANA cockpit did not show a database outage.
B. Correlate the CPU spike, query wait interval, and user delay timing before deciding whether threshold changes are appropriate.
C. Restart the database before the next planning run so the workload log starts from a clean state.
D. Raise the CPU alert threshold because the observed spike was brief and the database remained available.

問題 #2

A regional vehicle leasing company is updating its SAP HANA administration evidence model for a mixed landscape. The on-premises database supports active reporting, while an SAP HANA Cloud environment is used for migration rehearsal. During review, the administrator finds that the same readiness label is applied to architecture notes, active workload checks, and cloud rehearsal evidence. SAP HANA cockpit confirms the on-premises database is available, and SAP HANA Cloud Central confirms the cloud environment is running.
The constraint is that the administrator must avoid using one readiness label for different architectural responsibilities. The handover must show which evidence belongs to active operation, which belongs to cloud readiness, and which belongs to migration preparation.
Which action best strengthens the administration evidence model?

A. Separate evidence categories by active operation, cloud environment readiness, and migration preparation before approving handover.
B. Keep one readiness label because both environments are part of the same SAP HANA administration scope.
C. Use only the on-premises evidence because it supports the current active reporting workload.
D. Approve cloud readiness based on SAP HANA Cloud Central availability and defer architectural evidence mapping.

問題 #3

CHALLENGE 3 - Cloud Transition Evidence Boundary
The modernization lead wants the SAP HANA Cloud database included in the same readiness status as the remediation systems because it is provisioned and has a limited reporting dataset. The cloud environment has not completed the startup, monitoring, or recovery evidence package used for the template release. What is the best response?

A. Use the upgraded central system monitoring record as the SAP HANA Cloud readiness record.
B. Include the cloud database in the same readiness status because provisioning and test data show progress.
C. Stop modernization planning until the regional template release is fully completed.
D. Keep cloud transition evidence separate until cloud-specific administration validation is completed.

問題 #4

A regional textile manufacturer is rehearsing a phased migration from SAP HANA on-premises to SAP HANA Cloud. The source export finishes, the cloud target is reachable, and a small validation query succeeds on the target. During the readiness review, the administrator notices that the migration evidence does not include confirmation that the target-side administration user can perform required monitoring and backup review tasks after import. The project sponsor wants approval because the transfer and query were successful.
The constraint is that the migration wave must prove operational administration readiness in the cloud target, not only data movement. The rehearsal must remain repeatable for later migration waves.
Which recommendation is most appropriate?

A. Perform target-side administration validation with the intended cloud administration user and approve only after monitoring and backup review checks pass.
B. Approve the migration wave because the export completed and the target query succeeded.
C. Repeat the export with a larger dataset so the successful target query has stronger data coverage.
D. Use the on-premises administration user for target checks so the team can reuse the same operational procedure after migration.

問題 #5

CHALLENGE 3 - Freight Cloud Readiness Boundary
The executive update needs to cover current cutover readiness and future SAP HANA Cloud reporting migration. The on-premises cutover systems have backup and monitoring evidence, while the cloud database has provisioning and sample data only. Which action best supports accurate decision-making?

A. Delay cutover approval until SAP HANA Cloud carries the same freight reporting workload.
B. Separate current cutover readiness from SAP HANA Cloud migration readiness in the update.
C. Treat cloud provisioning as proof that the migration stream is ready for reporting transition.
D. Combine all evidence into one readiness status so the executive update is easier to read.

解説：