support@Free-Braindumps.com
Register Login
Cisco
CompTIA
ISC
EC-Council
EXIN
Fortinet
ITIL
Juniper
Microsoft
VMware
Avaya
SAP
Google
NVIDIA
Salesforce
Amazon
Palo Alto Networks
ISC2
Splunk
ServiceNow
All Vendors
  1. Home
  2. Exams
  3. Amazon
  4. Amazon-DEA-C01

Amazon Amazon-DEA-C01 Exam Prep
AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate (Page 3 )

Updated On: 20-Aug-2026
Page 3 of 47
PDF with 366 Questions

A data engineer needs to schedule a workflow that runs a set of AWS Glue jobs every day. The data engineer does not require the Glue jobs to run or finish at a specific time.
Which solution will run the Glue jobs in the MOST cost-effective way?

  1. Choose the FLEX execution class in the Glue job properties.
  2. Use the Spot Instance type in Glue job properties.
  3. Choose the STANDARD execution class in the Glue job properties.
  4. Choose the latest version in the GlueVersion field in the Glue job properties.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

The most cost-effective solution for running AWS Glue jobs daily without strict timing requirements is to utilize the FLEX execution class. The FLEX execution class in AWS Glue is designed for workloads that are less time-sensitive and can tolerate variations in execution time. This allows AWS Glue to leverage spare capacity, which translates into significant cost savings.
Options B, C, and D are not the most cost-effective.
While using Spot Instances (option B) could save money, Glue jobs do not have this configuration option directly, and Spot Instances can be terminated, leading to job failures. Moreover, this strategy introduces complexity related to handling potential interruptions. The STANDARD execution class (option C) doesn't offer any cost optimization specifically. Specifying the latest Glue version (option D) ensures you have the latest features and bug fixes, but it doesn't directly impact the cost of running the job.
The FLEX execution class allows AWS Glue to run your jobs when resources are most available and affordable. This is beneficial when specific start or end times aren’t critical, matching the use case mentioned in the question. Therefore, option A is the best strategy for cost optimization in this scenario. The other options might improve stability or ensure up-to-date software but do not offer the same level of cost efficiency. https://aws.amazon.com/glue/pricing/https://docs.aws.amazon.com/glue/latest/dg/aws-glue-programming-etl-execution.html



A data engineer needs to create an AWS Lambda function that converts the format of data from .csv to Apache Parquet. The Lambda function must run only if a user uploads a .csv file to an Amazon S3 bucket.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?

  1. Create an S3 event notification that has an event type of s3:ObjectCreated:*. Use a filter rule to generate notifications only when the suffix includes .csv. Set the Amazon Resource Name (ARN) of the Lambda function as the destination for the event notification.
  2. Create an S3 event notification that has an event type of s3:ObjectTagging:* for objects that have a tag set to .csv. Set the Amazon Resource Name (ARN) of the Lambda function as the destination for the event notification.
  3. Create an S3 event notification that has an event type of s3:*. Use a filter rule to generate notifications only when the suffix includes .csv. Set the Amazon Resource Name (ARN) of the Lambda function as the destination for the event notification.
  4. Create an S3 event notification that has an event type of s3:ObjectCreated:*. Use a filter rule to generate notifications only when the suffix includes .csv. Set an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic as the destination for the event notification. Subscribe the Lambda function to the SNS topic.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

Here's a detailed justification for why option A is the most suitable solution for triggering a Lambda function on S3 .csv uploads with minimal operational overhead:
Option A directly leverages S3 event notifications for object creation, specifically the s3:ObjectCreated:* event type. This ensures that the Lambda function is invoked only when a new object is uploaded to the S3 bucket. Crucially, the filter rule based on the .csv suffix refines this trigger, ensuring that only relevant file uploads trigger the function. This prevents unnecessary Lambda invocations and reduces costs. Direct invocation through the ARN keeps things simple and efficient.
Option B is incorrect because s3:ObjectTagging:* is for events related to object tags, which adds unnecessary complexity of setting tags on objects during upload. The scenario requires reacting to the file extension, not object tags.
Option C is incorrect because the s3:* event type is too broad and will trigger the Lambda function for all S3
events, including those unrelated to object creation (e.g., deletions, modifications). This results in unnecessary Lambda invocations and increased costs.
Option D is incorrect because while it uses the correct s3:ObjectCreated:* event type and suffix filter, it introduces an SNS topic as an intermediary. Using SNS adds an extra layer of complexity and potential points of failure. Direct invocation is more efficient.
Therefore, option A provides the most direct and efficient solution for triggering the Lambda function only when a .csv file is uploaded to the S3 bucket, minimizing operational overhead and costs compared to other options. It directly links the event to the Lambda function using the ARN for simplicity and performance.
Supporting Concepts and Links:
S3 Event Notifications: These are a core mechanism for triggering actions based on S3 events. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/EventNotifications.html Lambda Event Sources: S3 is a common event source for Lambda functions, enabling serverless processing of uploaded data. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/services-s3.html S3 Event Filtering: Using prefix/suffix filters on S3 event notifications is an efficient way to narrow down the scope of triggered events. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/notification-content-structure.html



A data engineer needs Amazon Athena queries to finish faster. The data engineer notices that all the files the Athena queries use are currently stored in uncompressed .csv format. The data engineer also notices that users perform most queries by selecting a specific column.
Which solution will MOST speed up the Athena query performance?

  1. Change the data format from .csv to JSON format. Apply Snappy compression.
  2. Compress the .csv files by using Snappy compression.
  3. Change the data format from .csv to Apache Parquet. Apply Snappy compression.
  4. Compress the .csv files by using gzip compression.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

C: Change the data format from .csv to Apache Parquet. Apply Snappy compression.
Apache Parquet is a columnar storage format optimized for analytical queries. It is highly efficient for query performance, especially when queries involve selecting specific columns, as it allows for column pruning and predicate pushdown optimizations.



A manufacturing company collects sensor data from its factory floor to monitor and enhance operational efficiency. The company uses Amazon Kinesis Data Streams to publish the data that the sensors collect to a data stream. Then Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose writes the data to an Amazon S3 bucket. The company needs to display a real-time view of operational efficiency on a large screen in the manufacturing facility.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LOWEST latency?

  1. Use Amazon Managed Service for Apache Flink (previously known as Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics) to process the sensor data. Use a connector for Apache Flink to write data to an Amazon Timestream database. Use the Timestream database as a source to create a Grafana dashboard.
  2. Configure the S3 bucket to send a notification to an AWS Lambda function when any new object is created. Use the Lambda function to publish the data to Amazon Aurora. Use Aurora as a source to create an Amazon QuickSight dashboard.
  3. Use Amazon Managed Service for Apache Flink (previously known as Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics) to process the sensor data. Create a new Data Firehose delivery stream to publish data directly to an Amazon Timestream database. Use the Timestream database as a source to create an Amazon QuickSight dashboard.
  4. Use AWS Glue bookmarks to read sensor data from the S3 bucket in real time. Publish the data to an Amazon Timestream database. Use the Timestream database as a source to create a Grafana dashboard.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

The most suitable solution for displaying real-time operational efficiency data with the lowest latency involves a combination of Flink, Timestream, and Grafana. Here's a detailed justification:

A: Use Amazon Managed Service for Apache Flink (previously known as Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics) to process the sensor data. Use a connector for Apache Flink to write data to an Amazon Timestream database. Use the Timestream database as a source to create a Grafana dashboard.
Lowest Latency Processing: Apache Flink excels at real-time stream processing. Using Flink to analyze sensor data directly from Kinesis Data Streams minimizes delays compared to batch-oriented approaches or triggering processes upon file creation in S3. It processes data as it arrives. Time Series Database: Amazon Timestream is specifically designed for time-series data, making it ideal for storing sensor data collected over time. Its optimized for high ingestion rates and fast queries on time-based data.
Real-Time Visualization: Grafana is well-suited for visualizing time-series data from Timestream. It offers flexible dashboarding capabilities for real-time monitoring.
Why other options are less suitable:
B: S3 notifications + Lambda + Aurora + QuickSight: This approach introduces latency due to the involvement of S3 event notifications, Lambda execution, and writing to Aurora. Aurora is a general-purpose relational database and less optimized for the characteristics of time series data.
C: Flink + Data Firehose to Timestream + QuickSight: Although this option uses Flink and Timestream, inserting Firehose between Flink and Timestream increases latency. Firehose is designed for buffering and batching data, which goes against the need for real-time updates. Firehose introduces latency because it buffers data before writing it to the destination.
D: Glue bookmarks + S3 + Timestream + Grafana: Glue bookmarks are not designed for real-time or near-real-time data extraction. Glue is a batch-oriented ETL service that polls for changes to the data source.
Conclusion:
Option A uses a combination of services that are specifically designed for real-time stream processing (Flink), time-series data storage (Timestream), and real-time visualization (Grafana), resulting in the lowest latency.
Authoritative Links:
Amazon Managed Service for Apache Flink: https://aws.amazon.com/flink/ Amazon Timestream: https://aws.amazon.com/timestream/ Grafana: https://grafana.com/



A company stores daily records of the financial performance of investment portfolios in .csv format in an Amazon S3 bucket. A data engineer uses AWS Glue crawlers to crawl the S3 data. The data engineer must make the S3 data accessible daily in the AWS Glue Data Catalog.
Which solution will meet these requirements?

  1. Create an IAM role that includes the AmazonS3FullAccess policy. Associate the role with the crawler. Specify the S3 bucket path of the source data as the crawler's data store. Create a daily schedule to run the crawler. Configure the output destination to a new path in the existing S3 bucket.
  2. Create an IAM role that includes the AWSGlueServiceRole policy. Associate the role with the crawler. Specify the S3 bucket path of the source data as the crawler's data store. Create a daily schedule to run the crawler. Specify a database name for the output.
  3. Create an IAM role that includes the AmazonS3FullAccess policy. Associate the role with the crawler. Specify the S3 bucket path of the source data as the crawler's data store. Allocate data processing units (DPUs) to run the crawler every day. Specify a database name for the output.
  4. Create an IAM role that includes the AWSGlueServiceRole policy. Associate the role with the crawler. Specify the S3 bucket path of the source data as the crawler's data store. Allocate data processing units (DPUs) to run the crawler every day. Configure the output destination to a new path in the existing S3 bucket.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

The correct answer is
B. Here's why:
AWS Glue Service Role: AWS Glue requires specific permissions to access data stores like S3 and write metadata to the AWS Glue Data Catalog. The AWSGlueServiceRole IAM policy provides these necessary permissions. Using AmazonS3FullAccess is overly permissive and violates the principle of least privilege.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/glue/latest/dg/glue-security.html
Crawler Configuration: The AWS Glue crawler needs to know the location of the data. Specifying the S3 bucket path as the crawler's data store tells the crawler where to find the .csv files.
Scheduled Execution: The requirement is to make the data accessible daily. Scheduling the crawler to run daily ensures that any changes to the .csv files in S3 are reflected in the Glue Data Catalog.
Data Catalog Output: Specifying a database name for the output tells the crawler where to store the metadata (table definitions) discovered from the .csv files. This makes the data accessible for querying and other data processing tasks using services like Athena or Redshift Spectrum.
Why other options are incorrect:
A and C: Using AmazonS3FullAccess is overly permissive. Allocating DPUs daily isn't directly related to scheduling; DPUs determine the computational power for the crawler.
While allocating DPUs is necessary for the crawler to function, the question is about the best way to keep the catalog updated daily. Specifying a new path is also incorrect, since the crawler updates metadata. D: While using the AWSGlueServiceRole is correct, allocating DPUs daily isn't directly related to setting the schedule for the crawler execution. The issue is about scheduling, not about resource allocation. The crawler updates metadata, so specifying a new output path is incorrect.



A company loads transaction data for each day into Amazon Redshift tables at the end of each day. The company wants to have the ability to track which tables have been loaded and which tables still need to be loaded. A data engineer wants to store the load statuses of Redshift tables in an Amazon DynamoDB table. The data engineer creates an AWS Lambda function to publish the details of the load statuses to DynamoDB.

How should the data engineer invoke the Lambda function to write load statuses to the DynamoDB table?

  1. Use a second Lambda function to invoke the first Lambda function based on Amazon CloudWatch events.
  2. Use the Amazon Redshift Data API to publish an event to Amazon EventBridge. Configure an EventBridge rule to invoke the Lambda function.
  3. Use the Amazon Redshift Data API to publish a message to an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue. Configure the SQS queue to invoke the Lambda function.
  4. Use a second Lambda function to invoke the first Lambda function based on AWS CloudTrail events.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

Here's a detailed justification for why option B is the most appropriate solution for invoking the Lambda function and updating the DynamoDB table with Redshift load statuses:
Option B: Use the Amazon Redshift Data API to publish an event to Amazon EventBridge. Configure an EventBridge rule to invoke the Lambda function.
This approach offers a loosely coupled, event-driven architecture that is highly scalable and maintainable. Here's a breakdown of why this is the best solution:
1. Redshift Data API for Event Emission: The Redshift Data API enables you to interact with Redshift clusters programmatically without the need for direct JDBC/ODBC connections within your Lambda function. Critically, it can be configured to publish events on command completion. This allows Redshift to signal when a table load operation completes, making it an ideal trigger for our workflow.
2. Amazon EventBridge for Event Routing: EventBridge is a serverless event bus service that simplifies the building of event-driven applications. It allows you to define rules that match specific event patterns and route them to different targets, like Lambda functions. In this scenario, we can configure EventBridge to listen for events emitted by the Redshift Data API upon completion of a load operation for a specific table.
3. Lambda Invocation by EventBridge: Once EventBridge receives an event matching our defined rule,
it will automatically invoke the Lambda function. The event data (containing information about the table, load status, timestamp, etc.) will be passed to the Lambda function as an argument.
4. DynamoDB Update: Inside the Lambda function, the event data can be parsed, and the corresponding load status for the specific table can be written to the DynamoDB table.
Why other options are not optimal:

A: Use a second Lambda function to invoke the first Lambda function based on Amazon CloudWatch events.
While CloudWatch can monitor Redshift, triggering a second Lambda based on metrics or logs might lead to delays or inaccuracies. Directly leveraging the Redshift Data API for events is more accurate and timely. CloudWatch events are better suited for monitoring cluster health than specific table load operations.
C: Use the Amazon Redshift Data API to publish a message to an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue. Configure the SQS queue to invoke the Lambda function.
While this approach can also work, it introduces an extra component (SQS) when EventBridge offers a more direct event-driven solution. EventBridge provides richer event filtering and routing capabilities, making it better suited for this scenario. SQS adds complexity without significant benefit.
D: Use a second Lambda function to invoke the first Lambda function based on AWS CloudTrail events. CloudTrail records API calls made to AWS services. It is not the intended mechanism for tracking table load statuses in Redshift. CloudTrail events can be too verbose, and relying on them for this purpose would be less reliable and more difficult to manage. Furthermore, it's less directly related to the event of a table load completing.
In summary:
Option B leverages the strengths of the Redshift Data API for event emission, EventBridge for efficient event routing, and Lambda for serverless processing, providing a scalable, reliable, and manageable solution for updating the DynamoDB table with Redshift load statuses.
Authoritative Links:
Amazon Redshift Data API: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift-data-api/latest/APIReference/Welcome.html Amazon EventBridge: https://aws.amazon.com/eventbridge/ AWS Lambda: https://aws.amazon.com/lambda/ Amazon DynamoDB: https://aws.amazon.com/dynamodb/



A data engineer needs to securely transfer 5 TB of data from an on-premises data center to an Amazon S3 bucket. Approximately 5% of the data changes every day. Updates to the data need to be regularly proliferated to the S3 bucket. The data includes files that are in multiple formats. The data engineer needs to automate the transfer process and must schedule the process to run periodically.
Which AWS service should the data engineer use to transfer the data in the MOST operationally efficient way?

  1. AWS DataSync
  2. AWS Glue
  3. AWS Direct Connect
  4. Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

Here's a detailed justification for why AWS DataSync is the most operationally efficient service for transferring the described dataset to S3, considering the constraints:
AWS DataSync is specifically designed for efficiently and securely transferring large datasets between on-premises storage and AWS storage services like S3. Its incremental transfer capability is key here. Because only 5% of the data changes daily, DataSync can identify and transfer only the modified data, minimizing transfer time and costs. AWS Glue is more suitable for ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) operations, data cataloging, and generating code for data transformations, and isn't optimized for bulk data transfer like this scenario.
AWS Direct Connect establishes a dedicated network connection between your on-premises environment and AWS.
While it can improve network performance and security compared to transferring data over the public internet, it doesn't provide the data transfer management features of DataSync. You'd still need a separate tool to handle the actual data transfer. Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration utilizes the AWS global network to accelerate transfers to S3. However, it is mainly for transferring data over the public internet and does not provide automated scheduling or incremental transfer functionalities. Therefore, DataSync handles the crucial requirements of periodic, automated, incremental data transfer.
DataSync offers built-in scheduling, allowing the engineer to automate the transfer process to run at regular intervals, which satisfies the "schedule the process to run periodically" requirement. It also handles various file formats, allowing easy handling of this variety data. DataSync also handles encryption and integrity verification during transfer, making it a secure solution. The service reduces the operational overhead significantly because it automates most aspects of data transfer.
Therefore, because DataSync automates and schedules the transfer, incrementally transfers updates, and is designed specifically to handle on-premises to cloud migrations, it is the most operationally efficient solution compared to the other options.
Reference Links:
AWS DataSync: https://aws.amazon.com/datasync/ AWS Glue: https://aws.amazon.com/glue/ AWS Direct Connect: https://aws.amazon.com/directconnect/ Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration: https://aws.amazon.com/s3/transfer-acceleration/



A company uses an on-premises Microsoft SQL Server database to store financial transaction data. The company migrates the transaction data from the on-premises database to AWS at the end of each month. The company has noticed that the cost to migrate data from the on-premises database to an Amazon RDS for SQL Server database has increased recently. The company requires a cost-effective solution to migrate the data to AWS. The solution must cause minimal downtown for the applications that access the database.
Which AWS service should the company use to meet these requirements?

  1. AWS Lambda
  2. AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS)
  3. AWS Direct Connect
  4. AWS DataSync

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

The correct answer is
B: AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) .
AWS DMS is specifically designed for database migration, making it the most suitable choice for migrating the on-premises SQL Server database to Amazon RDS for SQL Server. It supports heterogeneous migrations, meaning it can migrate between different database engines. DMS offers continuous data replication, which minimizes downtime as the database is continuously synchronized. It allows for a cutover at a convenient time, resulting in minimal disruption to applications. The continuous replication and the option for a cutover window address the requirement for minimal downtime.
AWS Lambda (A) is a serverless compute service used for running code in response to events.
While it could potentially be used for data migration, it would require significantly more custom coding and would be less efficient and more complex to manage than DMS for this specific task.
AWS Direct Connect (C) provides a dedicated network connection from on-premises to AWS.
While it can improve network performance and security, it doesn't directly migrate the data. It would only help in faster and more secure data transfer, but the migration tool is still needed, and it doesn't address the downtime requirement. It primarily reduces network costs, not the overall migration cost.
AWS DataSync (D) is primarily used for transferring large datasets between on-premises storage systems and AWS storage services like S3, EFS, and FSx. It's optimized for file-based data transfer, not for migrating database schemas and data directly to a managed database service like RDS.
DMS optimizes costs for ongoing migrations. It charges based on the compute resources used during the migration process, which can be cost-effective compared to manual or custom solutions. Therefore, DMS is the most appropriate and cost-effective option that minimizes downtime.
Further Research:
AWS DMS Documentation: https://aws.amazon.com/dms/ AWS DMS Best Practices: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/dms/latest/userguide/CHAP_BestPractices.html



  PDF
Viewing page 3 of 47
Viewing questions 17 - 24 out of 366 questions


Post your Comments and Discuss Amazon Amazon-DEA-C01 exam prep with other Community members:

AI Tutor AI Tutor 👋 I’m here to help!