A company collects data from thousands of remote devices by using a RESTful web services application that runs on an Amazon EC2 instance. The EC2 instance receives the raw data, transforms the raw data, and stores all the data in an Amazon S3 bucket. The number of remote devices will increase into the millions soon. The company needs a highly scalable solution that minimizes operational overhead.Which combination of steps should a solutions architect take to meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Answer(s): A,E
The correct options A and E leverage scalable, serverless data ingestion and processing paths that minimize operational overhead.A) Using AWS Glue to process data stored in S3 enables serverless ETL with automatic scaling and minimal infrastructure management.E) API Gateway combined with Kinesis Data Streams and Firehose provides scalable, managed ingestion from many devices and automatic delivery to S3.B) Route 53 only handles DNS routing and does not address data ingestion or processing scalability.C) Simply adding EC2 instances increases management overhead and does not efficiently scale ingestion/ETL.D) Pushing to SQS with EC2 processing introduces server management for workers and less seamless scaling compared to fully managed streaming/ETL services.
A company needs to retain its AWS CloudTrail logs for 3 years. The company is enforcing CloudTrail across a set of AWS accounts by using AWS Organizations from the parent account. The CloudTrail target S3 bucket is configured with S3 Versioning enabled. An S3 Lifecycle policy is in place to delete current objects after 3 years.After the fourth year of use of the S3 bucket, the S3 bucket metrics show that the number of objects has continued to rise. However, the number of new CloudTrail logs that are delivered to the S3 bucket has remained consistent.Which solution will delete objects that are older than 3 years in the MOST cost-effective manner?
Answer(s): B
The correct answer is B.A) Not valid because CloudTrail’s lifecycle expiration for 3 years is not a built-in centralized setting; S3 lifecycle already handles deletion, and per-version management is needed when versioning is enabled.B) Correct: when versioning is enabled, old versions persist. Including previous versions in the lifecycle policy ensures both current and noncurrent (previous) objects older than 3 years are deleted, reducing storage cost.C) Not cost-effective: Lambda polling/deletion incurs compute costs and scales poorly for large datasets; managed S3 lifecycle is designed for this use case.D) Ownership change does not impact object lifecycle or deletion costs; it won’t automate old-object deletion.
A company has an API that receives real-time data from a fleet of monitoring devices. The API stores this data in an Amazon RDS DB instance for later analysis. The amount of data that the monitoring devices send to the API fluctuates. During periods of heavy traffic, the API often returns timeout errors.After an inspection of the logs, the company determines that the database is not capable of processing the volume of write traffic that comes from the API. A solutions architect must minimize the number of connections to the database and must ensure that data is not lost during periods of heavy traffic.Which solution will meet these requirements?
Answer(s): C
The correct answer is C. Using an SQS queue with a Lambda consumer decouples ingestion from database writes, smoothing bursts and reducing database connections since Lambda scales independently and processes items at a controlled rate, preventing data loss via persistent storage in the queue.A) Increasing DB instance size reduces latency but does not address bursty writes or connection spikes; it may be cost-inefficient and still vulnerable to spikes.B) Multi-AZ provides high availability, not load shaping; writing to all active instances is complex and can increase contention and connections.D) SNS with Lambda still requires writes to the DB per item; it does not provide durable buffering for burst traffic like SQS.
A company manages its own Amazon EC2 instances that run MySQL databases. The company is manually managing replication and scaling as demand increases or decreases. The company needs a new solution that simplifies the process of adding or removing compute capacity to or from its database tier as needed. The solution also must offer improved performance, scaling, and durability with minimal effort from operations.Which solution meets these requirements?
Answer(s): A
Aurora Serverless for Aurora MySQL (A) provides on-demand capacity scaling, improved performance, durability, and minimal operations, meeting the need to simplify scaling the DB tier.B is incorrect because PostgreSQL compatibility does not align with existing MySQL workloads; Aurora MySQL is the appropriate option for MySQL compatibility.C is incorrect because consolidating into a single larger MySQL on bigger EC2s increases management effort, reduces elasticity, and does not provide automated scaling or durability benefits.D is incorrect because EC2 Auto Scaling for a database tier requires manual data replication and management; managed, serverless DB like Aurora Serverless reduces operational overhead.
A company is concerned that two NAT instances in use will no longer be able to support the traffic needed for the company’s application. A solutions architect wants to implement a solution that is highly available, fault tolerant, and automatically scalable.What should the solutions architect recommend?
The correct answer is C.A) Removing two NAT instances and using two NAT gateways in different Availability Zones provides highly available, fault-tolerant, and automatically scalable NAT for private subnets across AZs, with managed scalability and reduced maintenance compared to EC2 NAT instances. NAT Gateways are managed, highly available within an AZ pair, and support bursty traffic without manual scaling.B) Auto Scaling groups with Network Load Balancers do not apply to NAT functionality; NLBs distribute traffic to compute instances, not to managed NAT services. This approach adds complexity without providing automatic NAT scaling.D) Spot Instances are ephemeral and can be interrupted, making them unsuitable for a NAT gateway replacement that requires consistent network egress for private subnets. A Network Load Balancer does not address NAT functionality.
Post your Comments and Discuss Amazon AWS-SOLUTION-ARCHITECT-ASSOCIATE exam prep with other Community members:
Our website is free, but we have to fight against AI bots and content theft. We're sorry for the inconvenience caused by these security measures. You can access the rest of the AWS-SOLUTION-ARCHITECT-ASSOCIATE content, but please register or login to continue.