100 Free AWS SAA-C03 Practice Questions and Answers
100 questions for the AWS SAA-C03 exam, each answer explained. Watch it here, try the questions yourself, or read the transcript.
Questions in this video
Tap an answer to see why it is right or wrong. Tap it again to reset.
Question 1 Play from 00:00
The production EC2 instances run 24 hours a day. The development and test EC2 instances run for at least 8 hours each day. The company plans to implement automation to stop the development and test EC2 instances when they are not in use.
Which EC2 instance purchasing solution will meet the company's requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Spot Instances are unsuitable for production workloads requiring 24/7 availability due to potential interruptions; Reserved Instances for dev/test would waste money since those instances are stopped daily.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Reserved Instances provide the lowest hourly rate for production instances running 24/7 with predictable usage. On-Demand Instances are ideal for development and test environments that run only 8+ hours daily because they can be stopped during off-hours without penalty, avoiding the commitment cost of Reserved Instances. This combination minimizes costs across both persistent and variable workloads.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Spot Blocks require a specific block duration commitment and are more expensive than On-Demand for short, interrupted usage; production should use Reserved Instances for continuous operation.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
On-Demand Instances are expensive for 24/7 production use, and Spot Blocks cannot be reliably stopped/started for dev/test schedules.
Question 2 Play from 03:20
must design a scalable solution to accommodate demand that will grow rapidly over time.
Which solution meets these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Amazon S3 with Lambda is the most cost-effective serverless solution for this use case. S3 is ideal for storing large files (5 MB PDFs), S3 PUT events trigger Lambda functions automatically to convert files to JPG format, and the solution scales automatically with demand at minimal cost. Option B is inappropriate because DynamoDB has item size limits (400 KB) unsuitable for 5 MB files. Options C and D require managing EC2 instances and storage, adding operational and cost overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
DynamoDB has a maximum item size of 400 KB, making it unsuitable for storing and processing 5 MB PDF files.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
EBS storage is not automatically scalable across instances and requires manual capacity management; Elastic Beanstalk adds operational overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
EFS for a file conversion pipeline with EC2 instances adds unnecessary operational complexity and cost compared to serverless S3/Lambda approach.
Question 3 Play from 07:20
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
To integrate AWS SSO with an on-premises self-managed Microsoft Active Directory while continuing to manage users and groups there, AWS recommends establishing a one-way forest trust or one-way domain trust using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. This allows AWS SSO to authenticate against the on-premises AD without requiring two-way trust. One-way trust is sufficient because AWS resources only need to validate credentials from the on-premises directory.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
A two-way forest trust is not necessary; AWS SSO only needs to read and validate against the on-premises AD, which a one-way trust provides.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Creating a trust relationship directly without AWS SSO doesn't provide the centralized SSO solution needed across multiple AWS accounts.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Deploying an on-premises IdP separately doesn't leverage AWS SSO's native integration with AWS Organizations and doesn't simplify the solution.
Question 4 Play from 10:54
The company will deploy the application on multiple EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. All instances require access to the data that is stored in the EBS volume. The company needs a highly available and resilient solution that does not introduce significant changes to the application's code.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
A single EC2 instance with NFS creates a single point of failure and is not highly available or resilient.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
FSx for Windows File Server uses SMB protocol (not NFS) and is limited to a single AZ, reducing resilience.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Multiple EBS volumes attached to EC2 instances still require a single instance to manage them, creating a availability bottleneck.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
Amazon EFS is a managed network file system that supports NFS protocol and can be accessed by multiple EC2 instances across Availability Zones simultaneously. It provides high availability and resilience without requiring application code changes since it uses standard NFS. EFS automatically scales and is the ideal solution for multiple instances needing shared access to the same data.
Question 5 Play from 13:48
Which combination of steps will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? (Choose three.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is one of the answers.
Why A is right
Option A (S3 File Gateway) allows on-premises SMB file shares to write CSV data to Amazon S3. Option C (Glue Crawler) automatically creates table schemas from the CSV files in S3, enabling SQL queries. Option F (Athena) provides cost-effective SQL query capability directly against S3 data without requiring cluster infrastructure. Together, these provide a serverless, cost-effective pipeline from on-premises devices through S3 to SQL-queryable data.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
FSx File Gateway is for file system access, not the most cost-effective path for this CSV analysis use case.
Right, C is one of the answers.
Why C is right
Option A (S3 File Gateway) allows on-premises SMB file shares to write CSV data to Amazon S3. Option C (Glue Crawler) automatically creates table schemas from the CSV files in S3, enabling SQL queries. Option F (Athena) provides cost-effective SQL query capability directly against S3 data without requiring cluster infrastructure. Together, these provide a serverless, cost-effective pipeline from on-premises devices through S3 to SQL-queryable data.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
EMR is a managed cluster solution that requires more overhead and cost compared to Athena for periodic analytical queries.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
Redshift requires data loading and cluster management, making it more expensive than Athena for periodic query access patterns.
Right, F is one of the answers.
Why F is right
Option A (S3 File Gateway) allows on-premises SMB file shares to write CSV data to Amazon S3. Option C (Glue Crawler) automatically creates table schemas from the CSV files in S3, enabling SQL queries. Option F (Athena) provides cost-effective SQL query capability directly against S3 data without requiring cluster infrastructure. Together, these provide a serverless, cost-effective pipeline from on-premises devices through S3 to SQL-queryable data.
Question 6 Play from 16:56
Which storage solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Glacier Deep Archive requires retrieval operations and does not provide immediate accessibility as required.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
S3 Standard-IA (Infrequent Access) is designed for data accessed less frequently but still requires immediate availability with high durability and availability across multiple AZs. It provides cost savings compared to Standard while maintaining the same accessibility and resilience. After 30 days, the 75% of rarely accessed data can be transitioned to Standard- IA, reducing costs without sacrificing immediate access. Glacier Deep Archive requires retrieval requests and is not immediately accessible, violating requirements.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
One Zone-IA stores data in a single AZ, reducing resiliency compared to the multi-AZ Standard storage currently used.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Moving data immediately to One Zone-IA sacrifices the high availability and resiliency requirement, and the data accessed in the first 30 days should remain in Standard.
Question 7 Play from 19:41
The application needs to process submitted forms quickly. The application needs to process each form exactly once. The solution must ensure that no data is lost.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
SQS FIFO queues guarantee exactly-once message delivery and processing order, which is essential for form submissions where each form must be processed exactly once with no duplicates or losses. FIFO queues provide durable storage between tiers, ensuring no data is lost if the worker tier is temporarily unavailable. This is the standard pattern for form submission pipelines requiring exactly-once semantics.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
API Gateway is for HTTP communication, not for durable message storage or exactly-once delivery guarantees.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
SQS standard queues provide at-least-once delivery, not exactly-once, meaning forms could be processed multiple times.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Step Functions with synchronous workflows tie the web tier to the worker tier, eliminating the loose coupling requirement and blocking the web tier while processing occurs.
Question 8 Play from 22:40
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
ALB is optimized for HTTP/HTTPS at Layer 7, not for millions of UDP requests requiring ultra-low latency.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Gateway Load Balancer is designed for routing traffic through third-party virtual appliances, not for game server direct traffic.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Network Load Balancer (NLB) is purpose-built for ultra-high performance, extreme throughput scenarios with millions of requests per second and ultra-low latency. NLB supports UDP traffic natively and is the most cost-effective choice for these specific requirements. Application Load Balancer is optimized for Layer 7 (HTTP/HTTPS), Gateway Load Balancer is for appliance traffic, and multi-region deployment adds unnecessary cost and complexity.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Multi-region deployment significantly increases costs and adds unnecessary complexity for a single-region latency requirement.
Question 9 Play from 25:31
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Keeping data in Standard for 90 days is more expensive than transitioning to cheaper tiers; doesn't optimize costs.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Days 0-30: Keep in S3 Standard for high availability and frequent analysis. Days 30-90: Transition to S3 Standard-IA for backup retention at lower cost. Days 90+: Transition to S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval for long-term archival (though the requirement says delete at 90 days, this lifecycle approach is most cost-effective if retention extended). Delete after 90 days. This balances access performance, cost, and compliance requirements.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Transitioning directly to Glacier at day 30 sacrifices the cheaper Standard-IA tier for days 30-90 backup period.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
One Zone-IA is single-AZ and less highly available than Standard-IA; inappropriate for critical backup data.
Question 10 Play from 29:27
Which method is the MOST cost-effective for hosting the website?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
AWS Fargate containerizes applications unnecessarily for static content, incurring container orchestration and compute costs that S3 doesn't require.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Amazon S3 is the most cost-effective solution for hosting a static website consisting only of HTML, CSS, client-side JavaScript, and images. S3 offers static website hosting with minimal operational overhead, extremely low costs, automatic scalability, and built-in security features. No server compute resources are needed since all content is client-side or static.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
EC2 instances require ongoing management, patching, and compute costs that far exceed the minimal cost of S3 for static content hosting.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
ALB with Lambda functions adds unnecessary complexity and cost for serving static files; this approach is suitable only when backend processing is required.
Show all 100 questionsShow fewer questions
Question 11 Play from 31:48
In the event of a natural disaster in the us-west-1 Region, the company wants to recover workloads quickly in the us-west-2 Region. The company wants no more than 24 hours of data loss on the EC2 instances. The company also wants to automate any backups of the EC2 instances.
Which solutions will meet these requirements with the LEAST administrative effort? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Manual on-demand copying defeats the purpose of automation and requires administrative intervention.
Right, B is one of the answers.
Why B is right
Option B uses Data Lifecycle Manager to automatically create AMI backups twice daily (meeting 24-hour RPO) and automatically copies them to us-west-2 for disaster recovery, with minimal administrative effort. Option D uses AWS Backup to create automated backup plans with built-in cross-region copy functionality and scheduled backups, also meeting requirements with minimal overhead. Both eliminate manual processes while ensuring automated cross-region replication.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Introducing Lambda for backup copying adds unnecessary complexity when AWS Backup handles this natively.
Right, D is one of the answers.
Why D is right
Option B uses Data Lifecycle Manager to automatically create AMI backups twice daily (meeting 24-hour RPO) and automatically copies them to us-west-2 for disaster recovery, with minimal administrative effort. Option D uses AWS Backup to create automated backup plans with built-in cross-region copy functionality and scheduled backups, also meeting requirements with minimal overhead. Both eliminate manual processes while ensuring automated cross-region replication.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
Manual on-demand copying is required, defeating the goal of full automation.
Question 12 Play from 35:36
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
EC2 instances require manual provisioning and management of the underlying infrastructure.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
ECS on EC2 requires provisioning and managing EC2 worker nodes, not meeting the infrastructure management requirement.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
on AWS Fargate. Amazon ECS on AWS Fargate is the only option that removes the responsibility for provisioning and managing underlying infrastructure. Fargate is serverless and automatically handles infrastructure scaling and maintenance, allowing the company to focus entirely on their critical applications. Options A and D require EC2 instance management, while option B requires managing EC2 worker nodes.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
ECS-optimized EC2 instances still require provisioning and managing the EC2 infrastructure itself.
Question 13 Play from 38:05
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
AWS Config rules detect and report on tag changes but do not prevent them; they're monitoring/compliance tools, not access control mechanisms.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
AWS CloudTrail records API calls and tag modifications but does not prevent them; it's an auditing tool, not an enforcement mechanism.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Service Control Policies (SCPs) are the correct solution for preventing tag modification across all accounts in an AWS Organization. SCPs enforce organization-wide policies at the account level and can explicitly deny tag modification actions except for authorized principals. This provides the centralized, enforceable control needed across multiple accounts that other options cannot achieve.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
CloudWatch Logs are for monitoring and logging; they cannot prevent API actions or enforce access policies.
Question 14 Play from 40:35
Which solution will meet this requirement?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Switching to RDS Multi-AZ cluster does not address the 'too many connections' problem; it solves failover but does not reduce connection overhead.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Amazon RDS Proxy addresses the 'too many connections' error by pooling database connections, reducing connection overhead on the Aurora database. This also reduces failover time because there are fewer connections to reestablish when a replica is promoted to primary. Connection pooling maintains a manageable set of connections to the database backend, improving recovery efficiency during failover by approximately 20% or more.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
DynamoDB is a different database service and would require significant application rewriting; it does not solve the Aurora connection issue.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Redshift is for data warehousing and analytics, not transactional workloads, and does not address the connection pooling issue.
Question 15 Play from 43:01
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Governance mode allows users with specific permissions to override the retention period, which violates the requirement that no users can delete files.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
S3 Object Lock in compliance mode with a 365-day retention period meets all requirements: it prevents modification or deletion of objects for the specified period (satisfying the 1-year minimum retention), allows designated users to add files through proper IAM policies, and enforces read-only access for others. Compliance mode cannot be bypassed even by administrators, ensuring regulatory compliance.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
IAM policies alone cannot prevent file modification or deletion; a determined user with sufficient permissions could still circumvent these restrictions.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Lambda functions cannot enforce retention policies; they can only track changes after the fact without preventing modifications or deletions.
Question 16 Play from 45:46
What should a solutions architect do to improve the security of the data in transit?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Configuring a TLS listener and deploying the server certificate on the NLB directly encrypts data in transit between clients and the load balancer. This is the most direct and appropriate solution for securing data flowing through the network load balancer, addressing the specific security concern mentioned in the question.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
AWS Shield and WAF address DDoS and application-layer attacks, not encryption of data in transit.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
While WAF is useful for application security, switching to ALB is unnecessary and doesn't directly address data in transit encryption; NLB can support TLS.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
EBS encryption protects data at rest on EC2 volumes, not data in transit through the network.
Question 17 Play from 48:22
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
This reverses the correct services; CloudTrail is for API logging, not configuration tracking.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
AWS Config tracks configuration changes to AWS resources over time, while AWS CloudTrail records all API calls made to those resources. This combination provides comprehensive compliance, governance, and auditing capabilities as required.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
CloudWatch is for monitoring and metrics, not for API call recording; AWS Config is correct for tracking configuration changes.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
CloudWatch does not record API calls; CloudTrail is the correct service for that purpose.
Question 18 Play from 50:47
How should the company resolve this issue?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS WAF (Web Application Firewall) is specifically designed to protect web applications from common attacks including SQL injection. By placing AWS WAF in front of the ALB and configuring appropriate web ACLs with SQL injection protection rules, the company can filter malicious requests before they reach the application. This is the standard AWS solution for application-layer attack prevention.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
ALB listener rules cannot parse and detect SQL injection patterns; they operate at the connection level, not the application content level.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
AWS Shield Advanced primarily defends against DDoS attacks, not SQL injection attacks.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Amazon Inspector is a vulnerability assessment tool for scanning resources, not a runtime protection mechanism for blocking attacks.
Question 19 Play from 53:20
The company seeks a cloud storage solution that permits the copying of on-premises data to long-term persistent storage to make data available for processing by all EC2 instances. The solution should also be a high performance file system that is integrated with persistent storage to read and write datasets and output files.
Which combination of AWS services meets these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Amazon FSx for Lustre is a high-performance file system specifically designed for HPC workloads on Linux. It integrates seamlessly with Amazon S3, allowing data to be linked from S3 for processing and output files to be written back to S3 for long-term persistent storage. This combination provides both the high-performance file system needed for HPC and the persistent storage for analytics without operational complexity.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
FSx for Windows File Server is designed for Windows-based workloads, not Linux HPC applications.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
S3 Glacier is for archival, not high-performance file systems; EBS is block storage without the integrated persistent storage linking that Lustre provides.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
S3 with VPC endpoint and EBS gp2 lacks the high-performance parallel file system capabilities required for HPC workloads.
Question 20 Play from 56:13
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Sharing a 1 Gbps connection between accounts does not reduce the port charge and maintains unnecessary bandwidth capacity.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
The company has a 1 Gbps connection with less than 10% utilization, indicating significant overprovisioning. Downgrading to a 200 Mbps Direct Connect connection reduces costs substantially while still meeting actual usage needs. This can be provisioned directly through the AWS Management Console as a standard dedicated connection with full security maintained. A 200 Mbps connection at current low utilization rates provides adequate capacity while reducing monthly port charges.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Sharing connections with other accounts through a Partner-provisioned connection adds complexity and does not address the overprovisioning issue.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
While hosted connections through Partners may be cost-effective, provisioning through the AWS console (option B) is simpler and directly available, avoiding Partner intermediary costs.
Question 21 Play from 58:50
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Requires deploying and managing an EC2 instance, adding operational overhead versus managed services.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
AWS Glue is not designed as a real-time streaming processor or direct API endpoint; EC2 management also adds overhead.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Option C minimizes operational overhead by using fully managed services: API Gateway (no server management), Kinesis Data Streams (managed real-time ingestion), Lambda (serverless transformations), Kinesis Data Firehose (managed delivery to S3 with built-in buffering), and S3 (managed storage). No EC2 instances or manual scaling policies are required. Option A requires EC2 instance management, option B uses Glue incorrectly (not designed for streaming APIs or delivery), and option D also attempts to use Glue in a non-standard manner. API Gateway is superior to EC2 for serverless API hosting.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Glue is not designed to directly receive API calls; this architecture doesn't properly implement real-time streaming patterns.
Question 22 Play from 1:02:52
What should a solutions architect do to meet this requirement?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Network ACLs can only block traffic, not redirect HTTP to HTTPS.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Application Load Balancers do not have a rule action to replace URL schemes; they redirect using the redirect action.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Application Load Balancers support listener rules that can redirect HTTP traffic to HTTPS at the ALB layer. This is the native, built-in mechanism for enforcing HTTPS and requires no changes to backend applications or infrastructure. Option A uses network ACLs which block rather than redirect, option B attempts to manipulate URLs which ALBs don't do, and option D unnecessarily replaces the ALB.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Replacing the ALB with a Network Load Balancer is unnecessary and more complex; ALBs natively support HTTP-to-HTTPS redirection.
Question 23 Play from 1:05:20
The migration must be complete within 1 month. The company has 500 Mbps of dedicated bandwidth on its public internet connection available for data transfer.
What should a solutions architect do to migrate and store the data at the LOWEST cost?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS Snowball devices are the optimal solution for migrating 700 TB within one month. With 500 Mbps of available bandwidth, transferring 700 TB over the internet would take approximately 16 days of continuous transfer; Snowball accelerates this significantly. Snowball can transfer data in bulk without consuming internet bandwidth, and the lifecycle policy to transition to Glacier Deep Archive provides the lowest long-term storage cost for infrequently accessed backup data requiring 7-year retention.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
VPN transfers over 500 Mbps would take approximately 16 days; while technically possible, it's slower and more resource-intensive than Snowball.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Direct Connect provisioning takes time (typically weeks) and adds cost; Snowball is faster and more cost-effective for this one-time migration.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
DataSync would consume the 500 Mbps internet connection, taking approximately 16 days, and is slower than Snowball for bulk data migration.
Question 24 Play from 1:08:50
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS CloudWatch cross-account observability is the native AWS feature designed specifically for this use case. It allows a central monitoring account to query and visualize observability data across multiple accounts in an organization. The monitoring account enables the feature, and then CloudFormation templates are deployed in member accounts to establish the trust relationship and data sharing, enabling centralized dashboards and monitoring across the entire organization.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
SCPs manage permissions at the organization level but do not enable cross-account CloudWatch data sharing or observability.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Creating individual IAM users and policies for each account doesn't leverage the native cross-account observability feature and creates unnecessary management overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Manually creating cross-account IAM policies doesn't use the CloudWatch cross-account observability feature and is more complex than the built-in solution.
Question 25 Play from 1:12:01
The solutions architect has created an IAM role in the production account. The role has a policy that grants access to an S3 bucket in the production account.
Which solution will meet these requirements while complying with the principle of least privilege?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Administrator Access is overly permissive and violates the principle of least privilege.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Adding the development account as a principal in the trust policy of the production role allows IAM users from the development account to assume the role in the production account. This leverages existing IAM user management in the development account while granting precisely defined permissions through the role in production. This approach adheres to least privilege by only granting the specific permissions defined in the role's policy, avoiding over-permissive policies or creating duplicate user credentials.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Disabling Block Public Access makes buckets vulnerable to public exposure, contrary to security best practices.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Creating duplicate users in production violates the principle of least privilege and creates unnecessary account management overhead.
Question 26 Play from 1:14:36
The company's security team needs a single sign-on solution across all the company's AWS accounts. The company must continue to manage users and groups that are in the on-premises Active Directory.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Creating a new Enterprise Edition directory duplicates infrastructure and doesn't maintain the existing on-premises Active Directory as the source of truth.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Option B correctly establishes a two-way forest trust relationship between the on-premises self-managed Active Directory and AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory, which is then integrated with IAM Identity Center for single sign-on across multiple AWS accounts. This preserves existing user and group management on-premises while enabling SSO across the organization. Option A creates a new AWS-managed directory instead of using the existing on-premises one. Option C creates a trust relationship but doesn't integrate with IAM Identity Center for SSO. Option D uses an external IdP which unnecessarily replaces the existing Active Directory infrastructure.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
A two-way trust alone doesn't provide single sign-on capability across AWS accounts without IAM Identity Center integration.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Deploying an identity provider on EC2 duplicates infrastructure and abandons the existing managed Active Directory investment.
Question 27 Play from 1:18:10
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS Fargate on ECS with Service Auto Scaling provides the least operational overhead for containerized applications. Fargate eliminates EC2 instance management, Application Load Balancer handles request distribution, and Service Auto Scaling automatically adjusts capacity based on demand. This requires minimal code changes since the application runs in its existing container format. EC2 requires instance management; Lambda requires code rewrite; HPC is unnecessary for web request processing.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Fixed EC2 instances require manual capacity planning and instance management, and cannot scale to meet growing request volume automatically.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Lambda requires rewriting the application in a supported language, violating the 'minimum code changes' requirement.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
HPC solutions like ParallelCluster are designed for scientific computing workloads, not for scaling web application request processing.
Question 28 Play from 1:21:21
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
CloudHSM key store backed by a CloudHSM cluster requires significant provisioning and operational management.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
AWS Key Management Service (KMS) external key store (XKS) is purpose-built to meet regulatory requirements by allowing cryptographic keys to remain outside AWS while supporting multiple external key manager vendors. It requires the least operational overhead compared to alternatives, as it integrates seamlessly with AWS services without requiring custom key store setup or CloudHSM cluster management. CloudHSM requires provisioning and managing clusters, and the default KMS managed key store keeps keys within AWS, violating the compliance requirement.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
The default KMS managed key store stores keys in AWS, not outside the cloud, violating the compliance requirement.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Custom key stores backed by CloudHSM require cluster provisioning and management; XKS is simpler and supports more vendors.
Question 29 Play from 1:24:04
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Manual EC2 replication setup requires significant operational overhead, custom scripting, and ongoing monitoring.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
RDS Multi-AZ only provides high availability within a single region, not multi-region DR capability.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Amazon Aurora global database provides the least operational overhead for multi-region MySQL disaster recovery. It automatically handles replication across regions, provides near-zero RTO/RPO, and requires no manual configuration of replication. Unlike RDS Multi-AZ which only covers availability zones within a single region, Aurora global database natively spans multiple AWS Regions with read-only secondary clusters that can be promoted to primary in a DR event.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Restoring from S3 backups requires manual intervention and extended recovery time, making it unsuitable for a DR solution.
Question 30 Play from 1:27:08
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
CloudWatch Application Insights monitors application performance, not specific network access events like RDP or SSH connections.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
The AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore policy enables AWS Systems Manager Session Manager access, which doesn't notify on RDP/SSH access from external sources.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
VPC Flow Logs capture all network traffic flowing in and out of network interfaces, including RDP (port 3389) and SSH (port 22) connections. By publishing these logs to CloudWatch Logs, creating metric filters for these specific ports, and setting CloudWatch alarms with SNS notifications, the operations team receives real-time alerts whenever RDP or SSH access is established. This is the most direct and reliable method for detecting access events.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
EC2 Instance State-change Notifications only trigger when instances change state (start, stop, terminate), not when users establish RDP or SSH sessions.
Question 31 Play from 1:30:26
The company notices that the application is showing signs of performance degradation during busy times and is presenting 5xx errors. The company needs to make the application scale seamlessly.
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Manual scaling with two fixed instances doesn't automatically handle traffic spikes and provides no seamless scaling.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Route 53 weighted routing doesn't provide automatic scaling and requires manual instance management.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Stopping and changing instance types causes downtime and isn't seamless scaling.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
Option D provides seamless auto-scaling at minimal cost using Auto Scaling groups with Spot Instances. Since the application is stateless and resilient, it can leverage Spot Fleet for significant cost savings (up to 90% less than On-Demand). The Auto Scaling group automatically scales instances based on demand, and the ALB distributes traffic. This handles the performance degradation and 5xx errors while maintaining cost-effectiveness. Option A uses only two On-Demand instances with no auto-scaling. Option B uses Route 53 weighted routing which requires manual instance management. Option C stops/changes instance type causing downtime.
Question 32 Play from 1:34:15
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Downloading CSV files is a one-time manual process that does not provide regular automated reporting and requires repeated manual effort.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Loading Cost and Usage Reports into an RDS instance incurs database costs and requires manual SQL query maintenance, adding unnecessary operational and financial overhead.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Using cost allocation tags on all resources, activating them in the billing system, and leveraging Cost Explorer provides an automated, scalable, and cost-effective solution for ongoing cost tracking by application. Cost Explorer dynamically analyzes tagged resources and generates reports without additional storage or processing infrastructure, making it ideal for regular reporting with minimal operational overhead and no additional AWS service costs.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Downloading bills manually every month is operationally inefficient and does not scale; tags enable automated, dynamic reporting through Cost Explorer without manual downloads.
Question 33 Play from 1:37:22
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Querying based on active connection count adds operational complexity and still places load on production instances.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Creating a read replica of the RDS database and directing the reporting script to query only the read replica offloads read traffic from the primary instance, improving application performance with minimal operational overhead. Read replicas are automatically managed, cost-effective, and require no code changes beyond pointing the script to the replica endpoint. This approach is simpler and more scalable than identifying connections, manual exports, or caching.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Manual daily exports are operationally intensive, error-prone, and do not scale as data volume grows.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
ElastiCache adds complexity, requires application changes to use caching logic, and is unnecessary when read replicas can handle reporting queries.
Question 34 Play from 1:40:06
The solutions architect wants to use parallel data processing to process the data more quickly. The solutions architect also wants to use information that is stored in an Amazon Redshift database to enrich the data.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Amazon Athena is designed for SQL queries on S3 data but lacks native parallel processing for complex transformations and cannot efficiently integrate with Redshift for enrichment.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Amazon EMR is the primary service for parallel processing of large semistructured data in S3, providing distributed computing capabilities. EMR can also connect to Amazon Redshift to enrich data, making it the best choice for both parallel processing and data enrichment from Redshift in a single solution.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
While EMR can process data, using Kinesis Data Streams for enrichment is inefficient; direct Redshift integration with EMR is more appropriate.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
AWS Glue is an ETL service but is less suitable for large-scale parallel processing compared to EMR, and Lake Formation adds unnecessary complexity.
Question 35 Play from 1:43:05
The company needs a solution that prevents the accidental deletion of KMS keys. The solution must use Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) to send an email notification to administrators when a user attempts to delete a KMS key.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
AWS Config rules are designed for compliance checking, not for actively preventing operations; this approach is less direct.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Custom Lambda functions add unnecessary operational overhead and complexity for what AWS Systems Manager can handle natively.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
EventBridge detecting the DeleteKey operation with a Systems Manager Automation runbook provides the least operational overhead. The runbook can directly cancel the KMS key deletion through native AWS capabilities, while EventBridge simultaneously publishes SNS notifications. This approach avoids the complexity of custom Lambda logic (Option B) and Config rules (Option A), and is more actionable than CloudTrail logs with alarms that only monitor (Option D). The solution is automated, scalable, and requires minimal custom code.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
CloudTrail with CloudWatch alarms only provides notification after the fact; it does not prevent deletion, only monitors it.
Question 36 Play from 1:47:19
A solutions architect needs to design a highly available and fault-tolerant architecture for the application. The solutions architect creates an Auto Scaling group of EC2 instances.
Which set of additional steps should the solutions architect take to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
For a stateful production application requiring at least two running instances with high availability and fault tolerance, setting the minimum capacity to two and deploying one On- Demand instance in each of two different Availability Zones is the correct approach. This ensures the application can survive an AZ failure while maintaining the minimum required instances at the lowest cost. On-Demand instances are preferred for stateful applications where availability cannot be compromised.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Setting minimum capacity to four when only two instances are required wastes resources and increases costs unnecessarily.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Deploying all four Spot Instances in a single Availability Zone defeats the purpose of high availability across AZs, and Spot instances can be interrupted without notice.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Mixing On-Demand and Spot instances violates the high-availability requirement, as Spot instances can be terminated, potentially dropping below the required minimum.
Question 37 Play from 1:50:21
Which service should a solutions architect recommend?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Aurora MySQL requires selecting and provisioning specific instance types upfront, not meeting the requirement to avoid selecting a particular instance type.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Amazon Aurora Serverless for MySQL is ideal because it automatically scales compute capacity based on actual demand without requiring users to select or manage a specific instance type. This is perfect for the infrequent access patterns described, as it scales down to minimal capacity during idle periods and scales up when needed, reducing costs. Serverless also provides minimal downtime during migration and meets the requirement of not committing to a particular instance type in anticipation of growth.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Redshift Spectrum is designed for querying large datasets in S3 for analytics, not for hosting transactional databases used by sales teams.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
RDS for MySQL requires manual instance selection and capacity planning upfront, not meeting the requirement to avoid committing to a specific instance type.
Question 38 Play from 1:52:43
The solution must minimize cost and infrastructure maintenance.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Elastic resize and scaling to zero are not standard AWS features for EC2/RDS; this option misrepresents AWS capabilities.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Marketplace solutions add unnecessary cost and vendor dependency when native AWS services can accomplish the task more cost-effectively.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Launching an additional EC2 instance with crontab increases infrastructure maintenance overhead and infrastructure costs, contradicting the requirement to minimize both.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
AWS Lambda with EventBridge is the most cost-effective and maintenance-minimal solution for automatically starting and stopping EC2 and RDS instances on a schedule. Lambda eliminates the need to maintain additional infrastructure (unlike option C which requires launching and maintaining another EC2 instance), and it's a native AWS service that integrates seamlessly with EventBridge for cron-based scheduling. This approach requires minimal code changes and no third-party marketplace solutions.
Question 39 Play from 1:55:59
Which solution will meet these requirements with the MOST operational efficiency?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Lambda Function URLs provide a simple, direct HTTPS endpoint for the Lambda function without additional infrastructure. Launched specifically to address webhook scenarios, they require minimal setup and operational overhead, no load balancer, queue, or topic configuration needed. The third party simply calls the provided URL.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
ALB adds unnecessary infrastructure complexity and operational overhead compared to a direct Function URL.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
SNS is a pub/sub service and doesn't expose a direct webhook endpoint; requires additional integration layers.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
SQS is asynchronous queueing, not a direct webhook receiver; doesn't provide a public URL for webhooks.
Question 40 Play from 1:58:47
The solution must scale in and out appropriately according to demand on the individual container services. The solution also must not result in additional operational overhead or infrastructure to manage.
Which solutions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is one of the answers.
Why A is right
Both Amazon ECS with Fargate and Amazon EKS with Fargate are fully managed container orchestration platforms that automatically scale containers based on demand without requiring infrastructure management. Fargate eliminates the need to provision or manage EC2 instances, providing complete serverless container deployment. Both support Docker containers and handle scaling transparently.
Right, B is one of the answers.
Why B is right
Both Amazon ECS with Fargate and Amazon EKS with Fargate are fully managed container orchestration platforms that automatically scale containers based on demand without requiring infrastructure management. Fargate eliminates the need to provision or manage EC2 instances, providing complete serverless container deployment. Both support Docker containers and handle scaling transparently.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
API Gateway and Lambda cannot directly run Docker containers; Lambda requires code packages, not container images in the traditional sense.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
ECS with EC2 worker nodes requires managing EC2 instances, patching, scaling policies, and cluster infrastructure-adding operational overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
EKS with EC2 worker nodes requires managing Kubernetes clusters, node groups, updates, and infrastructure-significant operational burden.
Question 41 Play from 2:01:36
The company needs to scale out and scale in more instances based on workload.
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
AWS Fargate would be more expensive than Spot Instances for variable backend workloads and is container-focused, not traditional EC2.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Reserved Instances provide the lowest cost for the frontend nodes that run continuously 24/7, while Spot Instances offer up to 90% savings for the variable backend workload that scales in and out based on demand. This combination optimizes costs by matching instance types to their usage patterns.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Using Spot Instances for always-on frontend nodes risks interruption and is unreliable; Reserved Instances are appropriate for frontend.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Spot Instances for frontend workload is unreliable, and Fargate adds unnecessary cost compared to Spot for backend nodes.
Question 42 Play from 2:04:08
Which solution meets these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Kinesis Data Analytics is for stream processing and analysis, not for decoupling and fan-out to multiple independent consumer applications.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Auto Scaling EC2 based on CPU does not decouple the ingestion from consumption and doesn't address the fan-out requirement for multiple consumers.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Single Kinesis shard is a bottleneck for 100,000 messages per second, and DynamoDB adds unnecessary storage complexity when a queue is the appropriate pattern.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
Amazon SQS provides durable message queuing that decouples producers from consumers, and SNS with multiple SQS subscriptions enables multiple independent consumer applications to process the same messages. This architecture naturally scales to handle sudden spikes to 100,000 messages per second and allows each consumer application to scale independently.
Question 43 Play from 2:07:20
The company stores the app data in Amazon DynamoDB. The app communicates by using TCP traffic and UDP traffic between the users and the servers. The application will be used globally. The company wants to ensure the lowest possible latency for all users.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
ALB does not support UDP protocol, which is essential for real-time gaming applications requiring low latency.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
AWS Global Accelerator with a Network Load Balancer (NLB) is the correct solution for global gaming applications requiring both TCP and UDP traffic with minimal latency. Global Accelerator routes traffic through AWS's private global network to the nearest edge location, and NLB supports both TCP and UDP protocols. CloudFront (C, D) is designed for HTTP/HTTPS content delivery, not for gaming protocols requiring TCP and UDP support. ALB (A) does not support UDP, making it unsuitable for games that use UDP for real-time communication.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
CloudFront is for HTTP/HTTPS content delivery, not for TCP/UDP gaming traffic, and NLB behind CloudFront is not a valid configuration.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
CloudFront does not support UDP, and ALB behind CloudFront cannot handle gaming protocols; this configuration is also not supported.
Question 44 Play from 2:11:25
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Volume Gateway provides block storage, not NFS compatibility, and is generally more costly than S3.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
AWS Storage Gateway S3 File Gateway presents S3 as NFS storage, providing seamless migration from on-premises NFS while leveraging S3's scalability and cost-efficiency. S3 Lifecycle policies transition infrequent data to cheaper storage classes (Glacier, Deep Archive). Volume Gateway is block-based, less suitable for NFS workloads. EFS is more expensive than S3 for large-scale storage and lacks the lifecycle transition flexibility needed for cost optimization.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
EFS Standard-IA is more expensive than S3 with Lifecycle policies for long-term storage needs.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
EFS One Zone-IA is regional and more expensive than S3-based solutions, and lacks cross-AZ redundancy benefits.
Question 45 Play from 2:14:29
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
EventBridge and ECS don't address message persistence or automatic reprocessing of failed orders.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
An ALB without message queuing still loses orders during outages; there's no persistence mechanism.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Option C implements a decoupled architecture using Amazon SQS to queue orders, which prevents message loss during outages. EC2 instances consume from the queue, and Auto Scaling ensures capacity for processing. If instances fail, messages remain in the queue for reprocessing without manual intervention. This provides automatic resilience and prevents order reprocessing issues. Option A doesn't address message persistence. Option B doesn't decouple the system. Option D uses SNS which doesn't provide the guaranteed delivery and queuing needed for critical orders.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
SNS is a pub/sub service that doesn't guarantee message persistence for order processing; Lambda execution depends on SNS delivery timing.
Question 46 Play from 2:18:08
The application must be available publicly over the internet as an endpoint. A WAF must be applied to the endpoint for additional security. Session affinity (sticky sessions) must be configured on the endpoint.
Which combination of steps will meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Network Load Balancer does not natively support session affinity for web applications.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Gateway Load Balancer is designed for inline inspection by third-party appliances, not web application load balancing.
Right, C is one of the answers.
Why C is right
Application Load Balancer (ALB) natively supports session affinity/sticky sessions and can be associated with AWS WAF web ACLs for security. ALB is the appropriate choice for web applications requiring sticky sessions and WAF protection. Network Load Balancer does not support sticky sessions in the traditional sense. Gateway Load Balancer is for third-party virtual appliances. A second target group and Elastic IPs do not implement session affinity or meet requirements.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
A second target group and Elastic IPs do not implement session affinity functionality.
Right, E is one of the answers.
Why E is right
Application Load Balancer (ALB) natively supports session affinity/sticky sessions and can be associated with AWS WAF web ACLs for security. ALB is the appropriate choice for web applications requiring sticky sessions and WAF protection. Network Load Balancer does not support sticky sessions in the traditional sense. Gateway Load Balancer is for third-party virtual appliances. A second target group and Elastic IPs do not implement session affinity or meet requirements.
Question 47 Play from 2:20:46
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Manual endpoint selection doesn't provide automatic failover and requires ongoing management of routing logic.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Active-passive configuration means only one region serves requests, failing to optimize user proximity and throughput.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Cross-account replication requires manual setup and doesn't provide the automatic failover and intelligent routing of Multi-Region Access Points.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
S3 Multi-Region Access Points provide a single global endpoint that intelligently routes requests to the nearest S3 bucket, eliminating public network congestion and requiring minimal management. When combined with Cross-Region Replication, it creates an active-active configuration with automatic failover capabilities. The global endpoint handles all routing logic automatically, minimizing operational overhead. Option B uses passive configuration, which doesn't meet the active-active requirement. Option A requires manual endpoint management. Option C requires manual cross-account setup with no failover automation.
Question 48 Play from 2:23:59
The application is causing a high number of reads on the databases. A solutions architect must reduce the number of database reads while ensuring high availability.
What should the solutions architect do to meet this requirement?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Amazon RDS read replicas reduce database reads by distributing read traffic across multiple database instances while maintaining high availability. This is the most direct solution for reducing the number of reads on the primary database while ensuring data consistency and HA capabilities. Replicas can be promoted to primaries if needed. Caching solutions like ElastiCache are secondary and require application code changes to implement cache invalidation, whereas read replicas transparently serve read requests.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
ElastiCache for Redis requires application code changes to implement caching logic and cache invalidation, adding complexity.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Route 53 DNS caching is not relevant for application-level database read optimization.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
ElastiCache for Memcached, like Redis, requires application changes and is a secondary caching layer, not a primary solution for database scaling.
Question 49 Play from 2:26:15
Which solution meets these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Converting a Single-AZ RDS instance to Multi-AZ deployment is the simplest solution that requires no application code changes. AWS handles the failover automatically if the primary instance fails, maintaining a standby replica in another AZ. This is a straightforward modification that minimizes downtime and provides the required redundancy.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Creating a new Multi-AZ deployment and restoring from snapshot is unnecessary complexity; the existing instance can be converted directly.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Read replicas are not automatic failover targets; weighted routing across replicas requires application awareness and adds manual complexity.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
RDS databases cannot be placed in Auto Scaling groups; this approach is invalid and would require manual failover management.
Question 50 Play from 2:29:10
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
An internet gateway alone cannot help private subnet traffic reach the internet; IGWs require instances to have public IPs.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
A NAT gateway placed in a public subnet enables EC2 instances in private subnets to initiate outbound connections to the internet while remaining unreachable from the internet. The private subnet route table routes outbound traffic (0.0.0.0/0) through the NAT gateway. This is the standard AWS architecture for providing outbound internet access from private subnets without exposing instances directly to inbound traffic.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
NAT instances are outdated; they are less reliable and require more operational overhead than NAT gateways.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
This combination is incorrect; a NAT instance in the same private subnet cannot route its own traffic to itself.
Question 51 Play from 2:32:03
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
CloudWatch metrics in the AWS/Events namespace provide visibility into EventBridge rule invocations, including the number of triggered rules, failed invocations, and dead-letter queue sends. These metrics directly indicate whether rule conditions are being met and if targets are being invoked, making this the proper monitoring solution for EventBridge.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
SQS dead-letter queues only capture messages that fail delivery, not diagnostic information about whether rules are matching or targets are invoked.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
CloudWatch Logs stores application logs but EventBridge does not natively send event matching diagnostics to CloudWatch Logs by default.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
CloudTrail logs API calls and AWS service actions but does not provide real-time metrics about whether EventBridge rules are matching conditions or invoking targets.
Question 52 Play from 2:34:22
Which actions should a solutions architect take to resolve these performance issues? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
RDS instances do not support auto scaling; you manually scale the instance class or use read replicas.
Right, B is one of the answers.
Why B is right
Read replicas distribute read traffic away from the primary database, reducing load and improving performance during high traffic periods. ElastiCache caches frequently accessed query results, reducing database load further and improving application response times. Both solutions directly address the heavy read load problem identified in the scenario.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Multi-AZ provides high availability and failover, not read scaling; the standby instance cannot serve read traffic in a standard Multi-AZ setup.
Right, D is one of the answers.
Why D is right
Read replicas distribute read traffic away from the primary database, reducing load and improving performance during high traffic periods. ElastiCache caches frequently accessed query results, reducing database load further and improving application response times. Both solutions directly address the heavy read load problem identified in the scenario.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
Placing EC2 instances in the same AZ as the database does not address read load issues and can create availability zone concentration risk.
Question 53 Play from 2:37:07
Which solution meets these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS Secrets Manager is specifically designed for storing and rotating database credentials securely. It provides automatic rotation, encryption at rest, and fine-grained IAM policies to grant web servers access to retrieve credentials on-demand without embedding them in code. This meets both the security requirement for frequent credential rotation and the requirement for secure, frequent access.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
OpsCenter is designed for operational insights and runbooks, not credential storage; it lacks the automated rotation and security features needed for database credentials.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
S3 buckets are not designed for sensitive credentials; while encryption is possible, S3 lacks automatic rotation capabilities and imposes greater operational overhead for credential management.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Storing credentials on the web server file system is insecure and lacks automated rotation; credentials on disk are vulnerable to compromise if the server is breached.
Question 54 Play from 2:40:14
The company wants to use AWS services as a part of the solution. The EC2 instances are hosted in a VPC private subnet and access the internet through a NAT gateway that is deployed in a public subnet.
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
EC2 Instance Connect requires internet connectivity on the instance (or a bastion), and the bastion deployment adds unnecessary infrastructure cost.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Site-to-Site VPN requires separate VPN connections for remote and office workers, adding complexity and cost.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
A bastion host requires additional EC2 instance costs, management overhead, and security group configuration compared to Session Manager.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
AWS Systems Manager Session Manager provides secure, auditable SSH access to EC2 instances without requiring bastion hosts, VPNs, or SSH key management. By attaching the AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore IAM policy to EC2 instances, developers can access instances through Session Manager from anywhere with AWS credentials. This is the most cost-effective solution as it requires no additional infrastructure, provides encryption and audit logging, and works seamlessly with private subnets and NAT gateways.
Question 55 Play from 2:44:05
Which service should the solutions architect use to find the desired information?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Amazon GuardDuty is a threat detection service that identifies malicious activity and security issues, not a service for tracking configuration changes or identifying which user made them.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Amazon Inspector is a vulnerability assessment service that scans for vulnerabilities in applications and infrastructure, not for auditing user actions or configuration changes.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
AWS CloudTrail records all API calls made in an AWS account, including who made the call, when, what resource was affected, and what changes were made. It is the appropriate service to audit and trace which IAM user made configuration changes to security group rules. CloudTrail logs provide the detailed audit trail needed to identify the specific user responsible for the configuration changes.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
AWS Config tracks configuration changes to resources but does not identify which IAM user made the changes; CloudTrail is required to see the user responsible.
Question 56 Play from 2:46:22
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Provisioned concurrency is costly as it maintains warm instances continuously, even when not needed, since the company lacks strict latency requirements.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Increasing timeout does not reduce startup latency; it only affects execution duration limits.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
While increased memory can reduce cold start time slightly, it increases cost per invocation and is less efficient than SnapStart for Java.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
Lambda SnapStart for Java 11 is the most cost-effective solution to reduce cold starts without strict latency requirements. SnapStart creates a snapshot of the initialized function and restores it, dramatically reducing startup time with minimal additional cost. It specifically addresses cold starts and outlier latencies during scaling without the ongoing cost of provisioned concurrency.
Question 57 Play from 2:48:30
Because of new regulations, the company needs to keep the monthly snapshots for 7 years. The company needs to change its backup strategy to comply with the new regulations and to ensure that data is available with minimal administrative effort.
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
While S3 Glacier Deep Archive is cost-effective, manually copying snapshots requires additional administrative effort and API calls to S3.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
with a 7year retention period. EBS Snapshots Archive tier is specifically designed for long-term retention of snapshots at a significantly lower cost than standard storage while maintaining immediate accessibility. The solution keeps daily snapshots in the standard tier for short-term recovery (1 month) and automatically moves monthly snapshots to the archive tier for the 7-year retention requirement. This approach minimizes administrative effort through automated lifecycle policies and is more cost-effective than copying to S3 Glacier or maintaining all snapshots in standard tier.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Keeping monthly snapshots in standard tier for 7 years is significantly more expensive than using the archive tier.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Using EBS Direct APIs and S3 Infrequent Access involves manual scripting and more operational overhead than native snapshot lifecycle management.
Question 58 Play from 2:52:03
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS Backup is a centralized, policy-based service that handles backup and restore for both EC2 instances and RDS databases, with built-in support for cross-region copying. It requires minimal operational overhead as it automates the entire backup lifecycle and cross-region replication without requiring manual management of AMIs, snapshots, or S3 exports. This is simpler and more maintainable than the alternatives.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Amazon DLM is designed specifically for EBS snapshot lifecycle management and does not support RDS backups or cross-region copying of RDS resources.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
This approach requires manual creation of AMIs and manual RDS read replica setup, resulting in significantly higher operational overhead than AWS Backup.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
This requires manual EBS snapshot creation, manual RDS snapshot export to S3, and S3 CRR configuration, involving multiple steps and higher operational complexity than AWS Backup.
Question 59 Play from 2:54:57
The current architecture uses a static web frontend and a Java-based backend that contains the application logic. The architecture also uses a MySQL database that the company hosts on an Amazon EC2 instance.
The company needs to ensure that the application is secure and available globally.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
AWS Amplify adds unnecessary complexity for a non-production application, and EC2 Reserved Instances require ongoing management and do not provide auto-scaling.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Option B provides the least operational overhead by combining CloudFront with S3 for static content hosting (no server management), Lambda with API Gateway for microservices (fully managed, auto-scaling), and RDS for MySQL (managed relational database with automated backups and failover). This eliminates the need to manage EC2 instances while providing global availability through CloudFront.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Using NLB with Lambda in target groups adds unnecessary complexity; API Gateway is the standard, simpler approach for Lambda-based microservices.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Using only S3 without CloudFront limits global performance, and ALB with Lambda requires more configuration than API Gateway; EC2 instances require manual management.
Question 60 Play from 2:58:53
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Kinesis Data Streams requires additional code to consume and forward logs to OpenSearch, adding complexity versus Firehose.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
VPC Flow Logs sends network traffic information to CloudWatch Logs. Kinesis Data Firehose is the ideal service for reliably streaming log data from CloudWatch Logs to OpenSearch Service with built-in transformation and buffering capabilities. This provides near real-time analysis while being the most straightforward integration path.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
CloudTrail logs API activity, not network traffic; VPC Flow Logs do not send data to CloudTrail trails.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
CloudTrail is incorrect for VPC Flow Logs; VPC Flow Logs use CloudWatch Logs as their destination, not CloudTrail.
Question 61 Play from 3:02:02
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Lambda-based copying to S3 and replication creates significant operational overhead and requires rebuilding file shares from S3 in the secondary region.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
AWS Backup with manual volume restoration is more operationally intensive than native SnapMirror replication and introduces delays.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Using NetApp SnapMirror to replicate data from the primary FSx for ONTAP instance to a secondary region requires the least operational overhead. SnapMirror is a native NetApp replication technology that maintains the same file system structure and protocols (CIFS and NFS), requires minimal configuration, and automatically handles replication. This avoids manual copying, backup/restore procedures, and data migration efforts, while ensuring the secondary region can serve traffic using identical protocols and configurations.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Migrating to Amazon EFS requires data transformation, protocol changes (EFS is NFS-only, not CIFS), and eliminates NetApp-specific features already in use.
Question 62 Play from 3:05:18
However, the videos are large in their raw format.
Users are experiencing issues with buffering and playback on mobile devices. The company wants to implement solutions to maximize the performance and scalability of the app while minimizing operational overhead.
Which combination of solutions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is one of the answers.
Why A is right
A. Deploy Amazon CloudFront for content delivery and caching. C. Use Amazon Elastic Transcoder to convert the video files to more appropriate formats. CloudFront (A) is essential for content delivery and caching to reduce buffering and improve playback performance on mobile devices by distributing content geographically and caching at edge locations. Amazon Elastic Transcoder (C) converts large raw video files into mobile-optimized formats, reducing file sizes and enabling smooth playback on mobile devices. Together, these solutions maximize performance and scalability while minimizing operational overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
DataSync is for data replication between storage systems, not for optimizing video delivery or format conversion for mobile playback.
Right, C is one of the answers.
Why C is right
A. Deploy Amazon CloudFront for content delivery and caching. C. Use Amazon Elastic Transcoder to convert the video files to more appropriate formats. CloudFront (A) is essential for content delivery and caching to reduce buffering and improve playback performance on mobile devices by distributing content geographically and caching at edge locations. Amazon Elastic Transcoder (C) converts large raw video files into mobile-optimized formats, reducing file sizes and enabling smooth playback on mobile devices. Together, these solutions maximize performance and scalability while minimizing operational overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
EC2 instances in Local Zones are unnecessary and create operational overhead; CloudFront is the managed solution for content delivery.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
Using EC2 instances for transcoding creates significant operational overhead; Elastic Transcoder is the managed service designed specifically for this purpose.
Question 63 Play from 3:08:26
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
AWS Config requires custom rule creation and ongoing management for tracking incomplete multipart uploads; it's not optimized for S3-specific metrics.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Service Control Policies govern permissions and compliance enforcement, not data collection or reporting on incomplete multipart uploads.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
S3 Storage Lens provides comprehensive visibility into incomplete multipart uploads across all S3 buckets in multiple AWS accounts and regions. It automatically collects and reports metrics with minimal configuration, requiring no custom rules or policies. Storage Lens is purpose-built for organization-wide S3 analytics and compliance reporting with the least operational overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Multi-Region Access Points manage access patterns across regions, not cost compliance reporting on incomplete multipart uploads.
Question 64 Play from 3:11:02
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Using EC2 to run deletion scripts is not serverless and requires manual scaling and maintenance; it's not a scalable solution for millions of objects.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
AWS Batch requires provisioning compute resources; while it can process large jobs, Lambda with S3 Batch Operations is more serverless and cost-effective for this use case.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
AWS Glue crawler is designed for metadata discovery and cataloging, not for filtering and deleting objects; this approach adds unnecessary complexity compared to Lambda + S3 Batch Operations.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
S3 Inventory provides a manifest of all objects across the bucket, an AWS Lambda function filters objects by age and retention status, and S3 Batch Operations executes deletions at scale using the Lambda function as the action. This is fully serverless, requires no EC2 or Batch infrastructure, and efficiently handles millions of objects across multiple prefixes in Glacier Deep Archive.
Question 65 Play from 3:14:19
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational effort?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Cross-region deployment adds significant complexity, cost, and operational overhead while introducing higher latency and data consistency challenges.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Configuring the Auto Scaling group across multiple Availability Zones ensures EC2 instance redundancy, while Multi-AZ Aurora PostgreSQL provides automatic database failover with minimal data loss. Adding RDS Proxy improves connection efficiency and resilience. This solution achieves high availability with minimal downtime and data loss while requiring the least operational effort compared to managing cross-region replication, manual snapshots, or complex S3-based architectures.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Hourly snapshots result in 1 hour of potential data loss (unacceptable RPO) and require manual recovery processes, increasing operational effort.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Multi-region deployment with S3 as an intermediary is overly complex, introduces multiple points of failure, and does not align with relational database best practices.
Question 66 Play from 3:17:35
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Governance mode allows authorized users to modify or delete retention settings, which does not provide the required immutability for regulatory compliance.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Data Lifecycle Manager creates snapshots but does not provide vault locking or immutability guarantees required by regulations.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
S3 File Gateway with lifecycle management does not provide the same level of backup protection and compliance assurance as AWS Backup with vault lock.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
AWS Backup with vault lock in compliance mode is the correct solution for regulatory requirements to retain and protect backup files. Compliance mode ensures that backup files cannot be deleted or altered during the retention period, even by authorized users or AWS administrators. This meets the immutability requirement mandated by regulatory compliance. The backup plan can then be configured to handle both EC2 data and S3 buckets.
Question 67 Play from 3:20:16
Which solution should a solutions architect recommend to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS Backup is the purpose-built service for managing backups across AWS services including RDS. It provides centralized backup management, enforces retention policies, ensures consistency, and supports recovery. A backup vault with a daily schedule and 2- year expiration directly addresses the requirements. This is more robust than manual snapshot management and provides better compliance tracking.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Manual snapshot retention policies on RDS instances are not scalable across multiple instances and lack centralized management; DLM is designed for volume snapshots, not RDS snapshots.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
CloudWatch Logs is for log storage, not database backups, and does not provide restorable database snapshots.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
DMS with CDC to S3 captures change data but does not create consistent, restorable database backups suitable for retention policies.
Question 68 Play from 3:23:39
Which combination of steps will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Using Lambda to manually resize clusters adds operational overhead and is not the standard approach for Kubernetes autoscaling.
Right, B is one of the answers.
Why B is right
Horizontal Pod Autoscaler (HPA) with Kubernetes Metrics Server scales pods based on metrics like CPU and memory, while Cluster Autoscaler manages the underlying EC2 nodes to ensure pods have adequate resources. Together, these two components provide automatic scaling of both application workloads and cluster capacity with minimal operational overhead. This is the standard Kubernetes approach requiring no custom Lambda functions or additional AWS services.
Right, C is one of the answers.
Why C is right
Horizontal Pod Autoscaler (HPA) with Kubernetes Metrics Server scales pods based on metrics like CPU and memory, while Cluster Autoscaler manages the underlying EC2 nodes to ensure pods have adequate resources. Together, these two components provide automatic scaling of both application workloads and cluster capacity with minimal operational overhead. This is the standard Kubernetes approach requiring no custom Lambda functions or additional AWS services.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
API Gateway is for exposing APIs and has no role in cluster scaling.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
App Mesh is for observing network traffic but does not perform any scaling functions.
Question 69 Play from 3:25:57
The Global Accelerator accelerator forwards the traffic to an Application Load Balancer (ALB) that is the entry point for an Auto Scaling group.
The company recently identified a DDoS attack on the website. The company needs a solution to mitigate future attacks.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST implementation effort?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS WAF can be attached directly to Global Accelerator to provide DDoS protection with rate-based rules at the edge. This requires minimal implementation effort compared to other options. While WAF on ALB (option C) could work, attaching it to Global Accelerator is more efficient as it filters malicious traffic earlier in the pipeline, protecting the entire downstream infrastructure. Global Accelerator integrates seamlessly with WAF without additional architectural changes.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Lambda functions reading ALB metrics and updating network ACLs is overly complex, requires custom development, and lacks the native DDoS protection capabilities of WAF.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
While WAF on ALB works, it allows malicious traffic to reach the ALB first, wasting capacity. WAF on Global Accelerator filters traffic at the edge, which is more efficient.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Adding CloudFront in front of Global Accelerator adds unnecessary complexity and latency; Global Accelerator already provides edge routing and DDoS protection via WAF.
Question 70 Play from 3:29:01
The company decides to use Amazon DynamoDB as the primary database for the application. A solutions architect needs to identify a solution that handles the large data sizes.
Which solution will meet these requirements in the MOST operationally efficient way?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Using Lambda to filter data and routing to DocumentDB adds operational complexity and defeats the purpose of using DynamoDB as the primary database.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
DynamoDB has a 400 KB item size limit (item size includes attribute names and values). For data approaching 700 KB that will grow further, storing large objects in S3 and referencing them via URLs in DynamoDB items is the standard, operationally efficient pattern. This approach requires minimal refactoring and scales seamlessly as data sizes increase.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
BatchWriteItem does not increase item size limits; this approach would fail when items exceed the 400 KB limit regardless of batch operations.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Compression can reduce size somewhat, but 700 KB compressed may still exceed limits, and this approach adds unnecessary complexity compared to the S3 reference pattern.
Question 71 Play from 3:32:16
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Stopping instances and restarting them is inefficient and unreliable; scaling relies on launching new instances rather than merely starting stopped ones.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Setting minimum size large enough for peak traffic means paying for maximum capacity even during off-peak periods, wasting money most of the time.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Caching with CloudFront and ElastiCache adds complexity and cost; it does not address the core scaling problem and requires pre-scaling to populate caches.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
Configuring an Auto Scaling group to dynamically scale out as traffic increases during the seasonal sale, combined with a preconfigured AMI launch template, provides cost- effective capacity that grows on-demand only when needed. This approach avoids paying for unused capacity during non-peak times while ensuring the ability to handle traffic surges efficiently.
Question 72 Play from 3:35:22
• Web and application servers that run on Amazon EC2 instances as part of Auto Scaling groups
• An Amazon RDS DB instance for data storage
A solutions architect needs to limit access to the application servers so that only the web servers can access them.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
PrivateLink is for exposing services to external customers, not for internal multi-tier architecture access control.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
VPC endpoints are for private access to AWS services, not for controlling traffic between EC2 tiers.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Network ACLs are less granular and harder to manage dynamically; security groups are the proper mechanism for instance-level access control in this scenario.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
An Application Load Balancer placed in front of the application servers allows the security group associated with the ALB's target group to accept traffic only from the web servers' security group. This creates a logical access boundary where web servers can access application servers through the ALB, while the security group rules enforce this restriction at the instance level.
Question 73 Play from 3:38:22
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Enterprise edition with Always On availability groups is significantly more expensive than required; active/active multi-site setup exceeds cost minimization goals.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Warm standby maintains a running RDS instance, increasing costs; CDC-based DMS may not achieve 30-second RPO consistently.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery meets the RPO of 30 seconds and RTO of 60 minutes requirements. Configured as a pilot light, it continuously replicates disk changes to AWS at near-real-time intervals, providing recovery capability without running expensive infrastructure continuously. This is more cost-effective than warm standby and faster than backup-based approaches while using Standard edition licensing.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Nightly backups cannot meet 30-second RPO requirement; recovery would be measured in hours, not minutes, failing the RTO objective.
Question 74 Play from 3:41:19
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
CloudWatch Logs monitoring and manual Elastic Volumes resizing address storage volume size, not the snapshot accumulation that is the root cause.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Custom scripts for monitoring add operational overhead and do not address the root cause of accumulating snapshots.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Manually deleting snapshots is labor-intensive and provides no ongoing automation; Data Lifecycle Manager automates this process.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
The cost increase is primarily due to accumulating snapshots rather than increased EBS volume storage (the company states it does not purchase additional storage). Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager automates snapshot creation and deletion according to retention policies, preventing the accumulation of expired snapshots without manual intervention. This reduces snapshot costs with minimal operational overhead compared to manually deleting snapshots or monitoring storage utilization.
Question 75 Play from 3:44:22
Which solution will meet these requirements in the MOST operationally efficient way?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS AppSync pipeline resolvers provide the most operationally efficient solution for a serverless application that needs to retrieve data from multiple DynamoDB tables without impacting baseline performance. AppSync is designed specifically for GraphQL APIs that can efficiently query multiple data sources, and pipeline resolvers allow complex data retrieval logic while remaining serverless with minimal operational overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
CloudFront with Lambda@Edge adds complexity and is better suited for caching static content rather than dynamic database queries.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Edge-optimized API Gateway with Lambda functions requires more operational management and is less efficient than AppSync's native multi-table query capabilities.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Athena Federated Query is analytical, not operational, and adds latency unsuitable for a web application's baseline performance requirements.
Question 76 Play from 3:46:39
Lambda functions use CPU intensive code to process the messages. The company wants to reduce the compute costs and to maintain service latency for its customers.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Decreasing memory for CPU-intensive workloads reduces CPU allocation, increasing execution time and latency.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
For CPU-intensive workloads with high concurrency, reserved concurrency ensures consistent performance under load, while increasing memory also increases CPU allocation proportionally (Lambda pricing ties CPU to memory), reducing execution time and overall costs. Decreasing memory would worsen CPU-intensive performance. Provisioned concurrency adds warm-start cost without addressing the fundamental CPU efficiency issue. AWS Compute Optimizer recommends memory increases for CPU-bound workloads.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Provisioned concurrency adds unnecessary costs without improving CPU efficiency for batch processing.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
While Fargate recommendation is correct, provisioned concurrency adds cost overhead inappropriate for batch message processing.
Question 77 Play from 3:49:23
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
AWS Glue is an ETL service designed for data integration tasks, not general workflow orchestration for event-driven architectures.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Deploying on EC2 instances introduces operational overhead and contradicts the serverless requirement.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
EventBridge with scheduled Lambda invocations is not suitable for complex workflows requiring state management and conditional logic between steps.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
AWS Step Functions provides serverless orchestration with state machines that coordinate complex workflows across distributed components, including Lambda functions. This meets all requirements: event-driven architecture, distributed processing, serverless concepts, and minimal operational overhead. Step Functions manages the workflow logic without requiring infrastructure management.
Question 78 Play from 3:52:16
Each individual virtual server currently runs as its own EC2 instance. A solutions architect needs to ensure that the applications are reliable and fault tolerant after migration to AWS. The applications will run on Amazon EC2 instances.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
A minimum and maximum of 1 instance provides no redundancy, fault tolerance, or high availability.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Hourly backups don't prevent outages; recovery takes time and is not fault-tolerant across AZs.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
This solution provides reliability and fault tolerance without changing application designs. Creating an AMI preserves each application as-is, launching two instances in separate Availability Zones ensures fault tolerance across infrastructure failures, and a Network Load Balancer provides load distribution and failover. Option A with min/max of 1 provides no redundancy or fault tolerance. Option B's hourly backups don't prevent downtime during failures. Option D requires significant application refactoring into microservices, violating the constraint that application design cannot change.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Containerizing and breaking down applications into components requires significant design changes, which the requirements explicitly prohibit.
Question 79 Play from 3:56:12
Which combination of caching methods should a solutions architect implement to meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is one of the answers.
Why A is right
To balance performance with fresh content, set CloudFront's default TTL to 2 minutes (option A) so content caches briefly at edge locations while remaining relatively fresh. Additionally, implement CloudFront invalidation on deployment (option E) to immediately clear changed files from edge caches, preventing stale content from being served. This combination achieves caching benefits while ensuring minimal staleness after deployments.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
S3 bucket TTL settings don't control CloudFront edge caching behavior; only CloudFront TTL and Cache-Control headers from S3 matter.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
The private directive prevents caching at all, contradicting the goal of implementing caching for performance.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Lambda@Edge adds complexity and operational overhead without providing the straightforward solution that CloudFront TTL and invalidation offer.
Right, E is one of the answers.
Why E is right
To balance performance with fresh content, set CloudFront's default TTL to 2 minutes (option A) so content caches briefly at edge locations while remaining relatively fresh. Additionally, implement CloudFront invalidation on deployment (option E) to immediately clear changed files from edge caches, preventing stale content from being served. This combination achieves caching benefits while ensuring minimal staleness after deployments.
Question 80 Play from 3:58:59
Which steps must the solutions architect take to implement the correct permissions? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Lambda resource policies control API access to the Lambda function, not KMS permissions needed for decryption.
Right, B is one of the answers.
Why B is right
Lambda needs kms:Decrypt permissions in its execution role (B) to decrypt environment variables at runtime, and the KMS key policy must allow the Lambda execution role (D) to perform decryption. Option A places permissions in the wrong resource type, option C conflates function policy with execution role, and option E tries to add the resource policy to the key policy which is incorrect.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Lambda function policy is different from the execution role; KMS permissions must be in the execution role.
Right, D is one of the answers.
Why D is right
Lambda needs kms:Decrypt permissions in its execution role (B) to decrypt environment variables at runtime, and the KMS key policy must allow the Lambda execution role (D) to perform decryption. Option A places permissions in the wrong resource type, option C conflates function policy with execution role, and option E tries to add the resource policy to the key policy which is incorrect.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
Resource policies cannot be added to KMS key policies; the execution role identity must be allowed in the key policy instead.
Question 81 Play from 4:01:19
Which solutions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is one of the answers.
Why A is right
AWS Control Tower (Option A) provides guardrails that can enforce data residency and deny internet access at scale. AWS Organizations SCPs (Option C) can restrict service usage to specific regions and deny internet-related actions like creating IGWs. Together, these solutions provide organization-wide policy enforcement that meets both the regional and internet access compliance requirements without relying on individual resource configurations.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
AWS WAF is a web application firewall for Layer 7 protection, not for regional or internet access restrictions; account settings don't have a region restriction feature as described.
Right, C is one of the answers.
Why C is right
AWS Control Tower (Option A) provides guardrails that can enforce data residency and deny internet access at scale. AWS Organizations SCPs (Option C) can restrict service usage to specific regions and deny internet-related actions like creating IGWs. Together, these solutions provide organization-wide policy enforcement that meets both the regional and internet access compliance requirements without relying on individual resource configurations.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Network ACL rules and IAM policies are configuration-based rather than policy-based and would require manual implementation across every VPC and user, not scaling as guardrails.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
AWS Config can only detect and alert on non-compliant resources after they're created; it cannot proactively prevent non-compliant deployments like SCPs and Control Tower guardrails do.
Question 82 Play from 4:04:52
What should the solutions architect do to ensure that the architecture supports distributed session data management?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Amazon ElastiCache provides a distributed, in-memory session store that works seamlessly with horizontally scaled EC2 instances across multiple Availability Zones. As instances scale up and down, all instances can access the same session data from ElastiCache, avoiding session loss. This is the standard pattern for distributed session management in cloud architectures.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Sticky sessions on the ALB tie users to specific instances, defeating the benefits of auto-scaling and causing session loss when instances are terminated.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
AWS Systems Manager Session Manager is for managing SSH/RDP sessions to EC2 instances, not for application session data management.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
STS GetSessionToken is for AWS credential management, not for managing application user session data.
Question 83 Play from 4:07:33
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Route table rules control routing, not access control; they do not restrict traffic from unauthorized sources.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Security groups can reference other security groups by ID, allowing traffic only from the ALB's security group to the EC2 instances' security group. This implements the principle of least privilege, restricting inbound access to only the ALB while preventing access from any other source inside or outside the subnet, including other EC2 instances in the same private subnet.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Moving EC2 instances to public subnets defeats the security architecture and exposes them directly to the internet, violating security best practices.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Configuring the ALB security group to allow any TCP traffic does nothing to restrict traffic to the EC2 instances and exposes the ALB unnecessarily.
Question 84 Play from 4:10:13
Recently, the web application was overwhelmed while processing an unexpected volume of tracker data. Data was lost with no way to replay the events. A solutions architect must prevent this problem from happening again and needs a solution with the least operational overhead.
What should the solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
S3 is not designed for real-time event processing and doesn't provide the same message delivery guarantees.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
API Gateway with Lambda adds operational complexity and Lambda's concurrent execution limits may not handle the spike effectively.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Amazon SQS provides a message queue that buffers incoming tracker data, preventing data loss when the application is overwhelmed. The application polls the queue for messages to process at its own pace, decoupling data ingestion from processing. This provides reliable data replay capability and requires minimal operational overhead compared to other solutions.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
DynamoDB requires application polling logic and TTL-based cleanup is inefficient for this use case; SQS is purpose-built for this pattern.
Question 85 Play from 4:13:37
What should the solutions architect do to resolve this issue?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Auto Scaling groups don't enable external traffic to reach instances; they manage scaling. Auto Scaling group identifiers aren't routable endpoints.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
The requirement is to allow external internet traffic to reach a web server in a private subnet while maintaining security compliance. Option B correctly uses an internet-facing Application Load Balancer in a public subnet to receive external traffic on ports 80 and 443, then routes it to the EC2 instance in the private subnet via a target group. The ALB handles the network translation and provides a single entry point for traffic, meeting both the compliance requirement (instances in private subnets) and the accessibility requirement.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
NAT gateways enable outbound traffic from private subnets but do not accept inbound traffic from the internet. They're designed for outbound-only scenarios.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
EC2 instances in private subnets don't have public IP addresses by default, and even if assigned one, routing would fail because private subnets lack internet gateway routes for inbound traffic.
Question 86 Play from 4:17:14
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
AWS Global Accelerator provides automated failover across AWS Regions with health checks, ensuring high availability for latency-sensitive applications like VoIP. It uses Anycast IP addresses that don't require client-side IP caching, directing users to the nearest healthy endpoint globally. This meets all requirements: global distribution, automated failover, low latency, and no reliance on IP caching. Route 53 geolocation routing requires DNS resolution time and may rely on caching; CloudFront is for content delivery, not real-time VoIP; and Application Load Balancers only operate within a region.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Route 53 geolocation routing depends on DNS caching and may not provide the fastest failover for real-time VoIP traffic.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
CloudFront is designed for content delivery, not real-time VoIP applications requiring low-latency bidirectional communication.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Application Load Balancers operate only within a single region and do not provide cross-region failover or global distribution.
Question 87 Play from 4:19:50
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
DynamoDB is a different database service and does not provide connection pooling for RDS; changing to DynamoDB requires major application refactoring.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Amazon RDS Proxy manages database connections through connection pooling and multiplexing, allowing applications to establish multiple connections without exhausting the database's connection limit. This efficiently handles scaling workloads with minimal operational overhead since RDS Proxy is fully managed by AWS, no EC2 instances to maintain or custom code to develop. Applications simply change their connection endpoint to point to the RDS Proxy endpoint.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Custom proxies on EC2 require development, maintenance, patching, and operational oversight, adding significant overhead.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Lambda is not designed for persistent connection pooling and would introduce latency and complexity rather than reduce operational overhead.
Question 88 Play from 4:22:36
The company needs a managed AWS storage service that supports both NFS and SMB access. The solution must be able to share between protocols. The solution must have redundancy at the Availability Zone level.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP is purpose-built to support both SMB and NFS protocols simultaneously on the same storage system, allowing protocol-agnostic file sharing. It provides Availability Zone level redundancy through multi-AZ deployment and is a fully managed AWS service, making it ideal for consolidating Windows SMB and Linux NFS file servers.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Using separate EC2 instances for each protocol requires ongoing management and doesn't provide true redundancy or AZ-level fault tolerance.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Using separate FSx services (NetApp ONTAP for SMB and Lustre for NFS) prevents protocol sharing on common data.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
S3 File Gateway provides NFS/SMB access to S3 but cannot serve as a shared protocol-agnostic file system for SMB and NFS clients directly.
Question 89 Play from 4:25:32
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
The AWS Cost Explorer API provides programmatic access to current year usage costs and includes forecasting capabilities for the next 12 months. This is the most direct solution for integrating cost data into an operations dashboard, requiring no manual file downloads or email scheduling, and supports pagination for handling large datasets.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Downloadable CSV files require manual retrieval and integration, not suitable for programmatic access.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
AWS Budgets actions don't directly provide cost data and FTP is an outdated transfer method.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
AWS Budgets reports sent via SMTP are email-based and not suitable for programmatic access to a dashboard.
Question 90 Play from 4:27:56
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Lambda invocations add unnecessary operational complexity; Kinesis Data Analytics doesn't natively output to Parquet format without additional processing.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
EMR clusters require significant operational overhead including cluster management, scaling, and maintenance compared to serverless alternatives.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
EMR clusters add operational complexity for analysis when Kinesis Data Analytics provides a simpler serverless alternative.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
Kinesis Data Firehose automatically delivers data to S3 in Parquet format with built-in encryption support, eliminating the need to manage custom Lambda functions or manual transformations. Kinesis Data Analytics provides near-real-time analysis without requiring a managed cluster, reducing operational overhead. This combination addresses all requirements, near-real-time encryption, centralized Parquet storage, and analysis, with minimal operational complexity.
Question 91 Play from 4:31:09
The application needs to store data in a PostgreSQL database engine. The company wants the data in the database to be highly available. The company also needs increased capacity for read workloads.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the MOST operational efficiency?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
DynamoDB is NoSQL and not PostgreSQL-compatible; global tables add unnecessary complexity for single-region requirements.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Multi-AZ deployments provide high availability but do not include separate read replica endpoints for distributed read workload capacity.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
Amazon RDS Multi-AZ DB cluster deployment provides both high availability across multiple availability zones and dedicated read replicas within the cluster, all managed by AWS with minimal operational complexity. This architecture delivers automatic failover, read capacity expansion, and operational efficiency superior to other options for PostgreSQL on EKS.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Cross-Region read replicas add complexity and latency for a single-region deployment and do not address within-region read capacity as efficiently as Multi-AZ DB clusters.
Question 92 Play from 4:33:41
that the EC2 instances have a consistent CPU utilization at or near 100%. The company wants to improve system performance and scale the system based on user load.
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Creating copies without queue-based scaling doesn't address the bottleneck; jobs will still back up.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
S3 VPC endpoints reduce data transfer latency but don't increase processing capacity or handle scaling.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Vertical scaling is limited and doesn't provide auto-scaling based on load.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
The bottleneck is CPU utilization at 100%, indicating the system cannot process jobs fast enough. Using SQS as a buffer decouples request submission from processing, and Auto Scaling based on queue depth allows the system to dynamically scale EC2 instances up when jobs queue up. The software reads from the queue and processes at its own pace. This solves both scalability and performance issues. Simple load balancing doesn't address the processing bottleneck, S3 VPC endpoints reduce latency but don't scale capacity, and vertical scaling has limits.
Question 93 Play from 4:36:42
Which combination of actions should be taken to meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
A read-only ACL would prevent users from uploading and modifying documents, violating the requirements.
Right, B is one of the answers.
Why B is right
B. Enable versioning on the bucket. D. Enable MFA Delete on the bucket. Versioning preserves all versions of documents so deleted or modified documents can be recovered. MFA Delete requires multi-factor authentication to permanently delete object versions, adding an extra layer of protection against accidental deletion. Together, these features prevent accidental data loss while still allowing users to download, modify, and upload documents.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
An IAM policy controls access permissions but does not prevent accidental deletion or preserve versions.
Right, D is one of the answers.
Why D is right
B. Enable versioning on the bucket. D. Enable MFA Delete on the bucket. Versioning preserves all versions of documents so deleted or modified documents can be recovered. MFA Delete requires multi-factor authentication to permanently delete object versions, adding an extra layer of protection against accidental deletion. Together, these features prevent accidental data loss while still allowing users to download, modify, and upload documents.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why E is wrong
KMS encryption protects data at rest but does not prevent accidental deletion or provide version recovery.
Question 94 Play from 4:38:54
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements with the LEAST amount of downtime?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Right, A is the answer.
Why A is right
Option A provides the least downtime by pre-deploying infrastructure (Auto Scaling group and load balancer) in the disaster recovery region, eliminating the time needed to create resources during an outage. DynamoDB Global Tables provide automatic replication with minimal latency, and DNS failover (via Route 53) enables quick redirection to the standby region. This active-passive setup minimizes downtime compared to on-demand resource creation.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
Using CloudFormation templates to launch resources on-demand introduces significant delay during failover as instances must be created and initialized, increasing downtime.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
While this includes global tables for DynamoDB, creating EC2 and load balancer infrastructure on-demand via CloudFormation still introduces considerable failover latency.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
While this has pre-deployed infrastructure, using CloudWatch alarms and Lambda to update Route 53 adds complexity and latency compared to direct DNS failover configuration, increasing RTO.
Question 95 Play from 4:42:39
What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Reducing Lambda concurrency would limit application scalability and throughput rather than solving connection timeout issues.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
RDS Proxy manages database connection pooling, allowing many Lambda functions to share a smaller pool of database connections. This prevents connection exhaustion during traffic spikes and reduces timeout errors with minimal code changes, as applications can point to the proxy endpoint instead of the database.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Resizing the DB instance class to accept more connections is expensive and does not address the root cause of inefficient connection management.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Migrating to DynamoDB requires significant application code changes and may not be suitable for existing PostgreSQL relational queries.
Question 96 Play from 4:44:58
How can the solutions architect meet this requirement with the LEAST operational overhead?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Updating IAM policies requires managing policies in each account and for each user/group, creating significant operational overhead as the organization grows.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
AWS Resource Access Manager is designed for sharing resources between accounts, not for imposing restrictions on instance types.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Creating IAM roles in each account with individual developer access requires per-account management and doesn't scale efficiently as team membership changes.
Right, D is the answer.
Why D is right
AWS Organizations with Service Control Policies (SCPs) provides organization-wide enforcement with minimal operational overhead. A single SCP applied to all accounts prevents large EC2 instance launches across the entire organization, scaling automatically as new accounts are added. This approach requires no per-account configuration and centrally enforces the policy at the organization level, making it the least operationally intensive solution.
Question 97 Play from 4:48:07
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
An interface VPC endpoint for EC2 is unnecessary; Direct Connect alone doesn't provide S3 access without internet routing.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
A gateway VPC endpoint for S3 allows EC2 instances to access S3 buckets privately without traversing the public internet. Combined with AWS Direct Connect, which provides a dedicated network connection between on-premises and AWS, this ensures data never travels over the public internet. This satisfies both the S3 upload requirement and the on- premises consumption requirement.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
Transit Gateway cannot directly replace gateway endpoints for S3, and Site-to-Site VPN may still route through the internet depending on configuration.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Proxy EC2 instances with NAT gateways would still route traffic through the public internet, violating the compliance requirement.
Question 98 Play from 4:51:11
What should a solutions architect do to correct this issue?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Instance IDs are not valid sources or destinations for security group rules; security groups operate at the network level, not instance level.
Right, B is the answer.
Why B is right
Using security group IDs as sources/destinations for inter-tier communication implements the principle of least privilege by allowing traffic only between specific security groups. This is more granular than CIDR blocks and provides better security isolation between application tiers. Security group-to-security group rules are the AWS best practice for implementing least privilege in multi-tier architectures.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why C is wrong
VPC CIDR blocks are too broad and violate the principle of least privilege by allowing more traffic than necessary.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
Subnet CIDR blocks are also too broad and less precise than security group-based rules for inter-tier communication.
Question 99 Play from 4:53:35
(Amazon SQS) queue that is contained in the development team's account. The other company wants to poll the queue without giving up its own account permissions to do so.
How should a solutions architect provide access to the SQS queue?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Instance profiles are for EC2 instances and grant permissions to resources within an account, not for cross-account access.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
IAM policies would need to be created in the other company's account and would not grant them access to your queue.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
An SQS access policy (queue policy) is the appropriate mechanism for granting cross- account access to SQS resources. The policy can be attached to the queue itself and specify the other company's AWS account as a principal, allowing them to poll the queue without sharing their own account credentials or permissions. Instance profiles and IAM policies require creating resources in the other company's account, and SNS policies are for SNS resources, not SQS.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
SNS access policies are for Amazon SNS resources, not for granting access to SQS queues.
Question 100 Play from 4:56:07
The company wants to identify cost optimizations across the EC2 instances, the Auto Scaling group, and the EBS volumes.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the MOST operational efficiency?
Tap an answer. The reason for that answer shows here.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why A is wrong
Cost and Usage Reports provide cost data but do not automatically generate recommendations; manual analysis is required and lacks the intelligent optimization insights Compute Optimizer provides.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why B is wrong
CloudWatch billing alerts monitor spending thresholds but do not provide actionable cost optimization recommendations for specific resources.
Right, C is the answer.
Why C is right
AWS Compute Optimizer is specifically designed to analyze EC2 instances, Auto Scaling groups, and EBS volumes to provide cost and performance recommendations. It uses machine learning to identify right-sizing opportunities across these resources in a single, integrated tool, providing the most operational efficiency compared to manually searching Cost and Usage Reports or setting up CloudWatch alerts.
Not this one. Try another answer.
Why D is wrong
This approach splits recommendations between two tools unnecessarily, reducing operational efficiency; Compute Optimizer alone covers all three resource types.
Transcript
Play from 00:00 Question 1. A company wants to reduce the cost of its existing three-tier web architecture. The web, application, and database servers are running on Amazon EC2 instances for the development, test, and production environments. The EC2 instances average 30% CPU utilization during peak hours and 10% CPU utilization during non-peak hours. The production EC2 instances run 24 hours a day. The development and test EC2 instances run for at least 8 hours each day. The company plans to implement automation to stop the development and test EC2 instances when they are not in use. Which EC2 instance purchasing solution will meet the company's requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Use Spot Instances for the production EC2 instances. Use Reserved Instances for the development and test EC2 instances. Option B. Use Reserved Instances for the production EC2 instances. Use On-Demand Instances for the development and test EC2 instances. Option C. Use Spot blocks for the production EC2 instances. Use Reserved Instances for the development and test EC2 instances. Option D. Use On-Demand Instances for the production EC2 instances. Use Spot blocks for the development and test EC2 instances. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use Reserved Instances for the production EC2 instances. Use On-Demand Instances for the development and test EC2 instances. Reserved Instances provide the lowest hourly rate for production instances running 24/7 with predictable usage. On-Demand Instances are ideal for development and test environments that run only 8+ hours daily because they can be stopped during off-hours without penalty, avoiding the commitment cost of Reserved Instances. This combination minimizes costs across both persistent and variable workloads. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Spot Instances are unsuitable for production workloads requiring 24/7 availability due to potential interruptions; Reserved Instances for dev/test would waste money since those instances are stopped daily. Option C is incorrect. Spot Blocks require a specific block duration commitment and are more expensive than On-Demand for short, interrupted usage; production should use Reserved Instances for continuous operation. Option D is incorrect. On-Demand Instances are expensive for 24/7 production use, and Spot Blocks cannot be reliably stopped/started for dev/test schedules. Therefore, B, Use Reserved Instances for the production EC2 instances. Use On-Demand Instances for the development and test EC2 instances, is the correct answer.
Play from 03:20 Question 2. A company runs its infrastructure on AWS and has a registered base of 700,000 users for its document management application. The company intends to create a product that converts large .pdf files to .jpg image files. The .pdf files average 5 MB in size. The company needs to store the original files and the converted files. A solutions architect must design a scalable solution to accommodate demand that will grow rapidly over time. Which solution meets these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Save the .pdf files to Amazon S3. Configure an S3 PUT event to invoke an AWS Lambda function to convert the files to .jpg format and store them back in Amazon S3. Option B. Save the .pdf files to Amazon DynamoDUse the DynamoDB Streams feature to invoke an AWS Lambda function to convert the files to .jpg format and store them back in DynamoDB. Option C. Upload the .pdf files to an AWS Elastic Beanstalk application that includes Amazon EC2 instances, Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) storage, and an Auto Scaling group. Use a program in the EC2 instances to convert the files to .jpg format. Save the .pdf files and the .jpg files in the EBS store. Option D. Upload the .pdf files to an AWS Elastic Beanstalk application that includes Amazon EC2 instances, Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) storage, and an Auto Scaling group. Use a program in the EC2 instances to convert the file to .jpg format. Save the .pdf files and the .jpg files in the EBS store. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Save the .pdf files to Amazon S3. Configure an S3 PUT event to invoke an AWS Lambda function to convert the files to .jpg format and store them back in Amazon S3. Amazon S3 with Lambda is the most cost-effective serverless solution for this use case. S3 is ideal for storing large files (5 MB PDFs), S3 PUT events trigger Lambda functions automatically to convert files to JPG format, and the solution scales automatically with demand at minimal cost. Option B is inappropriate because DynamoDB has item size limits (400 KB) unsuitable for 5 MB files. Options C and D require managing EC2 instances and storage, adding operational and cost overhead. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. DynamoDB has a maximum item size of 400 KB, making it unsuitable for storing and processing 5 MB PDF files. Option C is incorrect. EBS storage is not automatically scalable across instances and requires manual capacity management; Elastic Beanstalk adds operational overhead. Option D is incorrect. EFS for a file conversion pipeline with EC2 instances adds unnecessary operational complexity and cost compared to serverless S3/Lambda approach. Therefore, A, Save the .pdf files to Amazon S3. Configure an S3 PUT event to invoke an AWS Lambda function to convert the files to .jpg format and store them back in Amazon S3, is the correct answer.
Play from 07:20 Question 3. A company is migrating applications to AWS. The applications are deployed in different accounts. The company manages the accounts centrally by using AWS Organizations. The company's security team needs a single sign-on (SSO) solution across all the company's accounts. The company must continue managing the users and groups in its on-premises self-managed Microsoft Active Directory. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Enable AWS Single Sign-On (AWS SSO) from the AWS SSO console. Create a one-way forest trust or a one-way domain trust to connect the company's self-managed Microsoft Active Directory with AWS SSO by using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. Option B. Enable AWS Single Sign-On (AWS SSO) from the AWS SSO console. Create a two-way forest trust to connect the company's self-managed Microsoft Active Directory with AWS SSO by using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. Option C. Use AWS Directory Service. Create a two-way trust relationship with the company's self-managed Microsoft Active Directory. Option D. Deploy an identity provider (IdP) on premises. Enable AWS Single Sign-On (AWS SSO) from the AWS SSO console. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Enable AWS Single Sign-On (AWS SSO) from the AWS SSO console. Create a one-way forest trust or a one-way domain trust to connect the company's self-managed Microsoft Active Directory with AWS SSO by using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. To integrate AWS SSO with an on-premises self-managed Microsoft Active Directory while continuing to manage users and groups there, AWS recommends establishing a one-way forest trust or one-way domain trust using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. This allows AWS SSO to authenticate against the on-premises AD without requiring two-way trust. One-way trust is sufficient because AWS resources only need to validate credentials from the on-premises directory. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. A two-way forest trust is not necessary; AWS SSO only needs to read and validate against the on-premises AD, which a one-way trust provides. Option C is incorrect. Creating a trust relationship directly without AWS SSO doesn't provide the centralized SSO solution needed across multiple AWS accounts. Option D is incorrect. Deploying an on-premises IdP separately doesn't leverage AWS SSO's native integration with AWS Organizations and doesn't simplify the solution. Therefore, A, Enable AWS Single Sign-On (AWS SSO) from the AWS SSO console. Create a one-way forest trust or a one-way domain trust to connect the company's self-managed Microsoft Active Directory with AWS SSO by using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory, is the correct answer.
Show full transcriptShow less
Play from 10:54 Question 4. A company is testing an application that runs on an Amazon EC2 Linux instance. A single 500 GB Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) General Purpose SSO (gp2) volume is attached to the EC2 instance. The company will deploy the application on multiple EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. All instances require access to the data that is stored in the EBS volume. The company needs a highly available and resilient solution that does not introduce significant changes to the application's code. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Provision an EC2 instance that uses NFS server software. Attach a single 500 GB gp2 EBS volume to the instance. Option B. Provision an Amazon FSx for Windows File Server file system. Configure the file system as an SMB file store within a single Availability Zone. Option C. Provision an EC2 instance with two 250 GB Provisioned IOPS SSD EBS volumes. Option D. Provision an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) file system. Configure the file system to use General Purpose performance mode. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Provision an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) file system. Configure the file system to use General Purpose performance mode. Amazon EFS is a managed network file system that supports NFS protocol and can be accessed by multiple EC2 instances across Availability Zones simultaneously. It provides high availability and resilience without requiring application code changes since it uses standard NFS. EFS automatically scales and is the ideal solution for multiple instances needing shared access to the same data. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. A single EC2 instance with NFS creates a single point of failure and is not highly available or resilient. Option B is incorrect. FSx for Windows File Server uses SMB protocol (not NFS) and is limited to a single AZ, reducing resilience. Option C is incorrect. Multiple EBS volumes attached to EC2 instances still require a single instance to manage them, creating a availability bottleneck. Therefore, D, Provision an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) file system. Configure the file system to use General Purpose performance mode, is the correct answer.
Play from 13:48 Question 5. A research company uses on-premises devices to generate data for analysis. The company wants to use the AWS Cloud to analyze the data. The devices generate .csv files and support writing the data to an SMB file share. Company analysts must be able to use SQL commands to query the data. The analysts will run queries periodically throughout the day. Which combination of steps will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? (Choose three.) Here are the options. Option A. Deploy an AWS Storage Gateway on premises in Amazon S3 File Gateway mode. Option B. Deploy an AWS Storage Gateway on premises in Amazon FSx File Gateway made. Option C. Set up an AWS Glue crawler to create a table based on the data that is in Amazon S3. Option D. Set up an Amazon EMR cluster with EMR File System (EMRFS) to query the data that is in Amazon S3. Provide access to analysts. Option E. Set up an Amazon Redshift cluster to query the data that is in Amazon S3. Provide access to analysts. Option F. Setup Amazon Athena to query the data that is in Amazon S3. Provide access to analysts. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are A. Deploy an AWS Storage Gateway on premises in Amazon S3 File Gateway mode, and C. Set up an AWS Glue crawler to create a table based on the data that is in Amazon S3, and F. Setup Amazon Athena to query the data that is in Amazon S3. Provide access to analysts. Option A (S3 File Gateway) allows on-premises SMB file shares to write CSV data to Amazon S3. Option C (Glue Crawler) automatically creates table schemas from the CSV files in S3, enabling SQL queries. Option F (Athena) provides cost-effective SQL query capability directly against S3 data without requiring cluster infrastructure. Together, these provide a serverless, cost-effective pipeline from on-premises devices through S3 to SQL-queryable data. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. FSx File Gateway is for file system access, not the most cost-effective path for this CSV analysis use case. Option D is incorrect. EMR is a managed cluster solution that requires more overhead and cost compared to Athena for periodic analytical queries. Option E is incorrect. Redshift requires data loading and cluster management, making it more expensive than Athena for periodic query access patterns. Therefore, A and C and F are the correct answers.
Play from 16:56 Question 6. A company stores its data objects in Amazon S3 Standard storage. A solutions architect has found that 75% of the data is rarely accessed after 30 days. The company needs all the data to remain immediately accessible with the same high availability and resiliency, but the company wants to minimize storage costs. Which storage solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Move the data objects to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days. Option B. Move the data objects to S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) after 30 days. Option C. Move the data objects to S3 One Zone-Infrequent Access (S3 One Zone-IA) after 30 days. Option D. Move the data objects to S3 One Zone-Infrequent Access (S3 One Zone-IA) immediately. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Move the data objects to S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) after 30 days. S3 Standard-IA (Infrequent Access) is designed for data accessed less frequently but still requires immediate availability with high durability and availability across multiple AZs. It provides cost savings compared to Standard while maintaining the same accessibility and resilience. After 30 days, the 75% of rarely accessed data can be transitioned to Standard- IA, reducing costs without sacrificing immediate access. Glacier Deep Archive requires retrieval requests and is not immediately accessible, violating requirements. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Glacier Deep Archive requires retrieval operations and does not provide immediate accessibility as required. Option C is incorrect. One Zone-IA stores data in a single AZ, reducing resiliency compared to the multi-AZ Standard storage currently used. Option D is incorrect. Moving data immediately to One Zone-IA sacrifices the high availability and resiliency requirement, and the data accessed in the first 30 days should remain in Standard. Therefore, B, Move the data objects to S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) after 30 days, is the correct answer.
Play from 19:41 Question 7. A solutions architect is designing an application that helps users fill out and submit registration forms. The solutions architect plans to use a two-tier architecture that includes a web application server tier and a worker tier. The application needs to process submitted forms quickly. The application needs to process each form exactly once. The solution must ensure that no data is lost. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) FIFO queue between the web application server tier and the worker tier to store and forward form data. Option B. Use an Amazon API Gateway HTTP API between the web application server tier and the worker tier to store and forward form data. Option C. Use an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) standard queue between the web application server tier and the worker tier to store and forward form data. Option D. Use an AWS Step Functions workflow. Create a synchronous workflow between the web application server tier and the worker tier that stores and forwards form data. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Use an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) FIFO queue between the web application server tier and the worker tier to store and forward form data. SQS FIFO queues guarantee exactly-once message delivery and processing order, which is essential for form submissions where each form must be processed exactly once with no duplicates or losses. FIFO queues provide durable storage between tiers, ensuring no data is lost if the worker tier is temporarily unavailable. This is the standard pattern for form submission pipelines requiring exactly-once semantics. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. API Gateway is for HTTP communication, not for durable message storage or exactly-once delivery guarantees. Option C is incorrect. SQS standard queues provide at-least-once delivery, not exactly-once, meaning forms could be processed multiple times. Option D is incorrect. Step Functions with synchronous workflows tie the web tier to the worker tier, eliminating the loose coupling requirement and blocking the web tier while processing occurs. Therefore, A, Use an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) FIFO queue between the web application server tier and the worker tier to store and forward form data, is the correct answer.
Play from 22:40 Question 8. An online video game company must maintain ultra-low latency for its game servers. The game servers run on Amazon EC2 instances. The company needs a solution that can handle millions of UDP internet traffic requests each second. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Configure an Application Load Balancer with the required protocol and ports for the internet traffic. Specify the EC2 instances as the targets. Option B. Configure a Gateway Load Balancer for the internet traffic. Specify the EC2 instances as the targets. Option C. Configure a Network Load Balancer with the required protocol and ports for the internet traffic. Specify the EC2 instances as the targets. Option D. Launch an identical set of game servers on EC2 instances in separate AWS Regions. Route internet traffic to both sets of EC2 instances. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Configure a Network Load Balancer with the required protocol and ports for the internet traffic. Specify the EC2 instances as the targets. Network Load Balancer (NLB) is purpose-built for ultra-high performance, extreme throughput scenarios with millions of requests per second and ultra-low latency. NLB supports UDP traffic natively and is the most cost-effective choice for these specific requirements. Application Load Balancer is optimized for Layer 7 (HTTP/HTTPS), Gateway Load Balancer is for appliance traffic, and multi-region deployment adds unnecessary cost and complexity. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. ALB is optimized for HTTP/HTTPS at Layer 7, not for millions of UDP requests requiring ultra-low latency. Option B is incorrect. Gateway Load Balancer is designed for routing traffic through third-party virtual appliances, not for game server direct traffic. Option D is incorrect. Multi-region deployment significantly increases costs and adds unnecessary complexity for a single-region latency requirement. Therefore, C, Configure a Network Load Balancer with the required protocol and ports for the internet traffic. Specify the EC2 instances as the targets, is the correct answer.
Play from 25:31 Question 9. A company wants to build a logging solution for its multiple AWS accounts. The company currently stores the logs from all accounts in a centralized account. The company has created an Amazon S3 bucket in the centralized account to store the VPC flow logs and AWS CloudTrail logs. All logs must be highly available for 30 days for frequent analysis, retained for an additional 60 days for backup purposes, and deleted 90 days after creation. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Transition objects to the S3 Standard storage class 30 days after creation. Write an expiration action that directs Amazon S3 to delete objects after 90 days. Option B. Transition objects to the S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) storage class 30 days after creation. Move all objects to the S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval storage class after 90 days. Write an expiration action that directs Amazon S3 to delete objects after 90 days. Option C. Transition objects to the S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval storage class 30 days after creation. Write an expiration action that directs Amazon S3 to delete objects after 90 days. Option D. Transition objects to the S3 One Zone-Infrequent Access (S3 One Zone-IA) storage class 30 days after creation. Move all objects to the S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval storage class after 90 days. Write an expiration action that directs Amazon S3 to delete objects after 90 days. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Transition objects to the S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) storage class 30 days after creation. Move all objects to the S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval storage class after 90 days. Write an expiration action that directs Amazon S3 to delete objects after 90 days. Days 0-30: Keep in S3 Standard for high availability and frequent analysis. Days 30-90: Transition to S3 Standard-IA for backup retention at lower cost. Days 90+: Transition to S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval for long-term archival (though the requirement says delete at 90 days, this lifecycle approach is most cost-effective if retention extended). Delete after 90 days. This balances access performance, cost, and compliance requirements. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Keeping data in Standard for 90 days is more expensive than transitioning to cheaper tiers; doesn't optimize costs. Option C is incorrect. Transitioning directly to Glacier at day 30 sacrifices the cheaper Standard-IA tier for days 30-90 backup period. Option D is incorrect. One Zone-IA is single-AZ and less highly available than Standard-IA; inappropriate for critical backup data. Therefore, B, Transition objects to the S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) storage class 30 days after creation. Move all objects to the S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval storage class after 90 days. Write an expiration action that directs Amazon S3 to delete objects after 90 days, is the correct answer.
Play from 29:27 Question 10. A development team needs to host a website that will be accessed by other teams. The website contents consist of HTML, CSS, client-side JavaScript, and images. Which method is the MOST cost-effective for hosting the website? Here are the options. Option A. Containerize the website and host it in AWS Fargate. Option B. Create an Amazon S3 bucket and host the website there. Option C. Deploy a web server on an Amazon EC2 instance to host the website. Option D. Configure an Application Load Balancer with an AWS Lambda target that uses the Express.js framework. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Create an Amazon S3 bucket and host the website there. Amazon S3 is the most cost-effective solution for hosting a static website consisting only of HTML, CSS, client-side JavaScript, and images. S3 offers static website hosting with minimal operational overhead, extremely low costs, automatic scalability, and built-in security features. No server compute resources are needed since all content is client-side or static. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. AWS Fargate containerizes applications unnecessarily for static content, incurring container orchestration and compute costs that S3 doesn't require. Option C is incorrect. EC2 instances require ongoing management, patching, and compute costs that far exceed the minimal cost of S3 for static content hosting. Option D is incorrect. ALB with Lambda functions adds unnecessary complexity and cost for serving static files; this approach is suitable only when backend processing is required. Therefore, B, Create an Amazon S3 bucket and host the website there, is the correct answer.
Play from 31:48 Question 11. A company has migrated multiple Microsoft Windows Server workloads to Amazon EC2 instances that run in the us-west-1 Region. The company manually backs up the workloads to create an image as needed. In the event of a natural disaster in the us-west-1 Region, the company wants to recover workloads quickly in the us-west-2 Region. The company wants no more than 24 hours of data loss on the EC2 instances. The company also wants to automate any backups of the EC2 instances. Which solutions will meet these requirements with the LEAST administrative effort? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Create an Amazon EC2-backed Amazon Machine Image (AMI) lifecycle policy to create a backup based on tags. Schedule the backup to run twice daily. Copy the image on demand. Option B. Create an Amazon EC2-backed Amazon Machine Image (AMI) lifecycle policy to create a backup based on tags. Schedule the backup to run twice daily. Configure the copy to the us-west-2 Region. Option C. Create backup vaults in us-west-1 and in us-west-2 by using AWS Backup. Create a backup plan for the EC2 instances based on tag values. Create an AWS Lambda function to run as a scheduled job to copy the backup data to us-west-2. Option D. Create a backup vault by using AWS Backup. Use AWS Backup to create a backup plan for the EC2 instances based on tag values. Define the destination for the copy as us-west-2. Specify the backup schedule to run twice daily. Option E. Create a backup vault by using AWS Backup. Use AWS Backup to create a backup plan for the EC2 instances based on tag values. Specify the backup schedule to run twice daily. Copy on demand to us-west-2. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are B. Create an Amazon EC2-backed Amazon Machine Image (AMI) lifecycle policy to create a backup based on tags. Schedule the backup to run twice daily. Configure the copy to the us-west-2 Region, and D. Create a backup vault by using AWS Backup. Use AWS Backup to create a backup plan for the EC2 instances based on tag values. Define the destination for the copy as us-west-2. Specify the backup schedule to run twice daily. Option B uses Data Lifecycle Manager to automatically create AMI backups twice daily (meeting 24-hour RPO) and automatically copies them to us-west-2 for disaster recovery, with minimal administrative effort. Option D uses AWS Backup to create automated backup plans with built-in cross-region copy functionality and scheduled backups, also meeting requirements with minimal overhead. Both eliminate manual processes while ensuring automated cross-region replication. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Manual on-demand copying defeats the purpose of automation and requires administrative intervention. Option C is incorrect. Introducing Lambda for backup copying adds unnecessary complexity when AWS Backup handles this natively. Option E is incorrect. Manual on-demand copying is required, defeating the goal of full automation. Therefore, B and D are the correct answers.
Play from 35:36 Question 12. A company wants to run its critical applications in containers to meet requirements for scalability and availability. The company prefers to focus on maintenance of the critical applications. The company does not want to be responsible for provisioning and managing the underlying infrastructure that runs the containerized workload. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use Amazon EC2 instances, and install Docker on the instances. Option B. Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) on Amazon EC2 worker nodes. Option C. Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) on AWS Fargate. Option D. Use Amazon EC2 instances from an Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)-optimized Amazon Machine Image (AMI). Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) on AWS Fargate. on AWS Fargate. Amazon ECS on AWS Fargate is the only option that removes the responsibility for provisioning and managing underlying infrastructure. Fargate is serverless and automatically handles infrastructure scaling and maintenance, allowing the company to focus entirely on their critical applications. Options A and D require EC2 instance management, while option B requires managing EC2 worker nodes. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. EC2 instances require manual provisioning and management of the underlying infrastructure. Option B is incorrect. ECS on EC2 requires provisioning and managing EC2 worker nodes, not meeting the infrastructure management requirement. Option D is incorrect. ECS-optimized EC2 instances still require provisioning and managing the EC2 infrastructure itself. Therefore, C, Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) on AWS Fargate, is the correct answer.
Play from 38:05 Question 13. A company is running its production and nonproduction environment workloads in multiple AWS accounts. The accounts are in an organization in AWS Organizations. The company needs to design a solution that will prevent the modification of cost usage tags. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create a custom AWS Config rule to prevent tag modification except by authorized principals. Option B. Create a custom trail in AWS CloudTrail to prevent tag modification. Option C. Create a service control policy (SCP) to prevent tag modification except by authorized principals. Option D. Create custom Amazon CloudWatch logs to prevent tag modification. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create a service control policy (SCP) to prevent tag modification except by authorized principals. Service Control Policies (SCPs) are the correct solution for preventing tag modification across all accounts in an AWS Organization. SCPs enforce organization-wide policies at the account level and can explicitly deny tag modification actions except for authorized principals. This provides the centralized, enforceable control needed across multiple accounts that other options cannot achieve. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. AWS Config rules detect and report on tag changes but do not prevent them; they're monitoring/compliance tools, not access control mechanisms. Option B is incorrect. AWS CloudTrail records API calls and tag modifications but does not prevent them; it's an auditing tool, not an enforcement mechanism. Option D is incorrect. CloudWatch Logs are for monitoring and logging; they cannot prevent API actions or enforce access policies. Therefore, C, Create a service control policy (SCP) to prevent tag modification except by authorized principals, is the correct answer.
Play from 40:35 Question 14. A company’s data platform uses an Amazon Aurora MySQL database. The database has multiple read replicas and multiple DB instances across different Availability Zones. Users have recently reported errors from the database that indicate that there are too many connections. The company wants to reduce the failover time by 20% when a read replica is promoted to primary writer. Which solution will meet this requirement? Here are the options. Option A. Switch from Aurora to Amazon RDS with Multi-AZ cluster deployment. Option B. Use Amazon RDS Proxy in front of the Aurora database. Option C. Switch to Amazon DynamoDB with DynamoDB Accelerator (DAX) for read connections. Option D. Switch to Amazon Redshift with relocation capability. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use Amazon RDS Proxy in front of the Aurora database. Amazon RDS Proxy addresses the 'too many connections' error by pooling database connections, reducing connection overhead on the Aurora database. This also reduces failover time because there are fewer connections to reestablish when a replica is promoted to primary. Connection pooling maintains a manageable set of connections to the database backend, improving recovery efficiency during failover by approximately 20% or more. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Switching to RDS Multi-AZ cluster does not address the 'too many connections' problem; it solves failover but does not reduce connection overhead. Option C is incorrect. DynamoDB is a different database service and would require significant application rewriting; it does not solve the Aurora connection issue. Option D is incorrect. Redshift is for data warehousing and analytics, not transactional workloads, and does not address the connection pooling issue. Therefore, B, Use Amazon RDS Proxy in front of the Aurora database, is the correct answer.
Play from 43:01 Question 15. A company needs to save the results from a medical trial to an Amazon S3 repository. The repository must allow a few scientists to add new files and must restrict all other users to read-only access. No users can have the ability to modify or delete any files in the repository. The company must keep every file in the repository for a minimum of 1 year after its creation date. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use S3 Object Lock in governance mode with a legal hold of 1 year. Option B. Use S3 Object Lock in compliance mode with a retention period of 365 days. Option C. Use an IAM role to restrict all users from deleting or changing objects in the S3 bucket. Use an S3 bucket policy to only allow the IAM role. Option D. Configure the S3 bucket to invoke an AWS Lambda function every time an object is added. Configure the function to track the hash of the saved object so that modified objects can be marked accordingly. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use S3 Object Lock in compliance mode with a retention period of 365 days. S3 Object Lock in compliance mode with a 365-day retention period meets all requirements: it prevents modification or deletion of objects for the specified period (satisfying the 1-year minimum retention), allows designated users to add files through proper IAM policies, and enforces read-only access for others. Compliance mode cannot be bypassed even by administrators, ensuring regulatory compliance. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Governance mode allows users with specific permissions to override the retention period, which violates the requirement that no users can delete files. Option C is incorrect. IAM policies alone cannot prevent file modification or deletion; a determined user with sufficient permissions could still circumvent these restrictions. Option D is incorrect. Lambda functions cannot enforce retention policies; they can only track changes after the fact without preventing modifications or deletions. Therefore, B, Use S3 Object Lock in compliance mode with a retention period of 365 days, is the correct answer.
Play from 45:46 Question 16. A company has a three-tier application on AWS that ingests sensor data from its users’ devices. The traffic flows through a Network Load Balancer (NLB), then to Amazon EC2 instances for the web tier, and finally to EC2 instances for the application tier. The application tier makes calls to a database. What should a solutions architect do to improve the security of the data in transit? Here are the options. Option A. Configure a TLS listener. Deploy the server certificate on the NLB. Option B. Configure AWS Shield Advanced. Enable AWS WAF on the NLB. Option C. Change the load balancer to an Application Load Balancer (ALB). Enable AWS WAF on the ALB. Option D. Encrypt the Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volume on the EC2 instances by using AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS). Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Configure a TLS listener. Deploy the server certificate on the NLB. Configuring a TLS listener and deploying the server certificate on the NLB directly encrypts data in transit between clients and the load balancer. This is the most direct and appropriate solution for securing data flowing through the network load balancer, addressing the specific security concern mentioned in the question. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. AWS Shield and WAF address DDoS and application-layer attacks, not encryption of data in transit. Option C is incorrect. While WAF is useful for application security, switching to ALB is unnecessary and doesn't directly address data in transit encryption; NLB can support TLS. Option D is incorrect. EBS encryption protects data at rest on EC2 volumes, not data in transit through the network. Therefore, A, Configure a TLS listener. Deploy the server certificate on the NLB, is the correct answer.
Play from 48:22 Question 17. A company hosts its multi-tier applications on AWS. For compliance, governance, auditing, and security, the company must track configuration changes on its AWS resources and record a history of API calls made to these resources. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS CloudTrail to track configuration changes and AWS Config to record API calls. Option B. Use AWS Config to track configuration changes and AWS CloudTrail to record API calls. Option C. Use AWS Config to track configuration changes and Amazon CloudWatch to record API calls. Option D. Use AWS CloudTrail to track configuration changes and Amazon CloudWatch to record API calls. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use AWS Config to track configuration changes and AWS CloudTrail to record API calls. AWS Config tracks configuration changes to AWS resources over time, while AWS CloudTrail records all API calls made to those resources. This combination provides comprehensive compliance, governance, and auditing capabilities as required. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. This reverses the correct services; CloudTrail is for API logging, not configuration tracking. Option C is incorrect. CloudWatch is for monitoring and metrics, not for API call recording; AWS Config is correct for tracking configuration changes. Option D is incorrect. CloudWatch does not record API calls; CloudTrail is the correct service for that purpose. Therefore, B, Use AWS Config to track configuration changes and AWS CloudTrail to record API calls, is the correct answer.
Play from 50:47 Question 18. A media company hosts its website on AWS. The website application’s architecture includes a fleet of Amazon EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB) and a database that is hosted on Amazon Aurora. The company’s cybersecurity team reports that the application is vulnerable to SQL injection. How should the company resolve this issue? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS WAF in front of the ALB. Associate the appropriate web ACLs with AWS WAF. Option B. Create an ALB listener rule to reply to SQL injections with a fixed response. Option C. Subscribe to AWS Shield Advanced to block all SQL injection attempts automatically. Option D. Set up Amazon Inspector to block all SQL injection attempts automatically. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Use AWS WAF in front of the ALB. Associate the appropriate web ACLs with AWS WAF. AWS WAF (Web Application Firewall) is specifically designed to protect web applications from common attacks including SQL injection. By placing AWS WAF in front of the ALB and configuring appropriate web ACLs with SQL injection protection rules, the company can filter malicious requests before they reach the application. This is the standard AWS solution for application-layer attack prevention. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. ALB listener rules cannot parse and detect SQL injection patterns; they operate at the connection level, not the application content level. Option C is incorrect. AWS Shield Advanced primarily defends against DDoS attacks, not SQL injection attacks. Option D is incorrect. Amazon Inspector is a vulnerability assessment tool for scanning resources, not a runtime protection mechanism for blocking attacks. Therefore, A, Use AWS WAF in front of the ALB. Associate the appropriate web ACLs with AWS WAF, is the correct answer.
Play from 53:20 Question 19. A company wants to use high performance computing (HPC) infrastructure on AWS for financial risk modeling. The company’s HPC workloads run on Linux. Each HPC workflow runs on hundreds of Amazon EC2 Spot Instances, is short-lived, and generates thousands of output files that are ultimately stored in persistent storage for analytics and long-term future use. The company seeks a cloud storage solution that permits the copying of on-premises data to long-term persistent storage to make data available for processing by all EC2 instances. The solution should also be a high performance file system that is integrated with persistent storage to read and write datasets and output files. Which combination of AWS services meets these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Amazon FSx for Lustre integrated with Amazon S3. Option B. Amazon FSx for Windows File Server integrated with Amazon S3. Option C. Amazon S3 Glacier integrated with Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS). Option D. Amazon S3 bucket with a VPC endpoint integrated with an Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) General Purpose SSD (gp2) volume. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Amazon FSx for Lustre integrated with Amazon S3. Amazon FSx for Lustre is a high-performance file system specifically designed for HPC workloads on Linux. It integrates seamlessly with Amazon S3, allowing data to be linked from S3 for processing and output files to be written back to S3 for long-term persistent storage. This combination provides both the high-performance file system needed for HPC and the persistent storage for analytics without operational complexity. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. FSx for Windows File Server is designed for Windows-based workloads, not Linux HPC applications. Option C is incorrect. S3 Glacier is for archival, not high-performance file systems; EBS is block storage without the integrated persistent storage linking that Lustre provides. Option D is incorrect. S3 with VPC endpoint and EBS gp2 lacks the high-performance parallel file system capabilities required for HPC workloads. Therefore, A, Amazon FSx for Lustre integrated with Amazon S3, is the correct answer.
Play from 56:13 Question 20. A company needs to minimize the cost of its 1 Gbps AWS Direct Connect connection. The company's average connection utilization is less than 10%. A solutions architect must recommend a solution that will reduce the cost without compromising security. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Set up a new 1 Gbps Direct Connect connection. Share the connection with another AWS account. Option B. Set up a new 200 Mbps Direct Connect connection in the AWS Management Console. Option C. Contact an AWS Direct Connect Partner to order a 1 Gbps connection. Share the connection with another AWS account. Option D. Contact an AWS Direct Connect Partner to order a 200 Mbps hosted connection for an existing AWS account. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Set up a new 200 Mbps Direct Connect connection in the AWS Management Console. The company has a 1 Gbps connection with less than 10% utilization, indicating significant overprovisioning. Downgrading to a 200 Mbps Direct Connect connection reduces costs substantially while still meeting actual usage needs. This can be provisioned directly through the AWS Management Console as a standard dedicated connection with full security maintained. A 200 Mbps connection at current low utilization rates provides adequate capacity while reducing monthly port charges. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Sharing a 1 Gbps connection between accounts does not reduce the port charge and maintains unnecessary bandwidth capacity. Option C is incorrect. Sharing connections with other accounts through a Partner-provisioned connection adds complexity and does not address the overprovisioning issue. Option D is incorrect. While hosted connections through Partners may be cost-effective, provisioning through the AWS console (option B) is simpler and directly available, avoiding Partner intermediary costs. Therefore, B, Set up a new 200 Mbps Direct Connect connection in the AWS Management Console, is the correct answer.
Play from 58:50 Question 21. A company needs to configure a real-time data ingestion architecture for its application. The company needs an API, a process that transforms data as the data is streamed, and a storage solution for the data. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Deploy an Amazon EC2 instance to host an API that sends data to an Amazon Kinesis data stream. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream that uses the Kinesis data stream as a data source. Use AWS Lambda functions to transform the data. Use the Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to send the data to Amazon S3. Option B. Deploy an Amazon EC2 instance to host an API that sends data to AWS Glue. Stop source/destination checking on the EC2 instance. Use AWS Glue to transform the data and to send the data to Amazon S3. Option C. Configure an Amazon API Gateway API to send data to an Amazon Kinesis data stream. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream that uses the Kinesis data stream as a data source. Use AWS Lambda functions to transform the data. Use the Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to send the data to Amazon S3. Option D. Configure an Amazon API Gateway API to send data to AWS Glue. Use AWS Lambda functions to transform the data. Use AWS Glue to send the data to Amazon S3. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Configure an Amazon API Gateway API to send data to an Amazon Kinesis data stream. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream that uses the Kinesis data stream as a data source. Use AWS Lambda functions to transform the data. Use the Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to send the data to Amazon S3. Option C minimizes operational overhead by using fully managed services: API Gateway (no server management), Kinesis Data Streams (managed real-time ingestion), Lambda (serverless transformations), Kinesis Data Firehose (managed delivery to S3 with built-in buffering), and S3 (managed storage). No EC2 instances or manual scaling policies are required. Option A requires EC2 instance management, option B uses Glue incorrectly (not designed for streaming APIs or delivery), and option D also attempts to use Glue in a non-standard manner. API Gateway is superior to EC2 for serverless API hosting. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Requires deploying and managing an EC2 instance, adding operational overhead versus managed services. Option B is incorrect. AWS Glue is not designed as a real-time streaming processor or direct API endpoint; EC2 management also adds overhead. Option D is incorrect. Glue is not designed to directly receive API calls; this architecture doesn't properly implement real-time streaming patterns. Therefore, C, Configure an Amazon API Gateway API to send data to an Amazon Kinesis data stream. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream that uses the Kinesis data stream as a data source. Use AWS Lambda functions to transform the data. Use the Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to send the data to Amazon S3, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:02:52 Question 22. A company has a website hosted on AWS. The website is behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB) that is configured to handle HTTP and HTTPS separately. The company wants to forward all requests to the website so that the requests will use HTTPS. What should a solutions architect do to meet this requirement? Here are the options. Option A. Update the ALB's network ACL to accept only HTTPS traffic. Option B. Create a rule that replaces the HTTP in the URL with HTTPS. Option C. Create a listener rule on the ALB to redirect HTTP traffic to HTTPS. Option D. Replace the ALB with a Network Load Balancer configured to use Server Name Indication (SNI). Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create a listener rule on the ALB to redirect HTTP traffic to HTTPS. Application Load Balancers support listener rules that can redirect HTTP traffic to HTTPS at the ALB layer. This is the native, built-in mechanism for enforcing HTTPS and requires no changes to backend applications or infrastructure. Option A uses network ACLs which block rather than redirect, option B attempts to manipulate URLs which ALBs don't do, and option D unnecessarily replaces the ALB. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Network ACLs can only block traffic, not redirect HTTP to HTTPS. Option B is incorrect. Application Load Balancers do not have a rule action to replace URL schemes; they redirect using the redirect action. Option D is incorrect. Replacing the ALB with a Network Load Balancer is unnecessary and more complex; ALBs natively support HTTP-to-HTTPS redirection. Therefore, C, Create a listener rule on the ALB to redirect HTTP traffic to HTTPS, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:05:20 Question 23. A company has 700 TB of backup data stored in network attached storage (NAS) in its data center. This backup data need to be accessible for infrequent regulatory requests and must be retained 7 years. The company has decided to migrate this backup data from its data center to AWS. The migration must be complete within 1 month. The company has 500 Mbps of dedicated bandwidth on its public internet connection available for data transfer. What should a solutions architect do to migrate and store the data at the LOWEST cost? Here are the options. Option A. Order AWS Snowball devices to transfer the data. Use a lifecycle policy to transition the files to Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive. Option B. Deploy a VPN connection between the data center and Amazon VPC. Use the AWS CLI to copy the data from on premises to Amazon S3 Glacier. Option C. Provision a 500 Mbps AWS Direct Connect connection and transfer the data to Amazon S3. Use a lifecycle policy to transition the files to Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive. Option D. Use AWS DataSync to transfer the data and deploy a DataSync agent on premises. Use the DataSync task to copy files from the on-premises NAS storage to Amazon S3 Glacier. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Order AWS Snowball devices to transfer the data. Use a lifecycle policy to transition the files to Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive. AWS Snowball devices are the optimal solution for migrating 700 TB within one month. With 500 Mbps of available bandwidth, transferring 700 TB over the internet would take approximately 16 days of continuous transfer; Snowball accelerates this significantly. Snowball can transfer data in bulk without consuming internet bandwidth, and the lifecycle policy to transition to Glacier Deep Archive provides the lowest long-term storage cost for infrequently accessed backup data requiring 7-year retention. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. VPN transfers over 500 Mbps would take approximately 16 days; while technically possible, it's slower and more resource-intensive than Snowball. Option C is incorrect. Direct Connect provisioning takes time (typically weeks) and adds cost; Snowball is faster and more cost-effective for this one-time migration. Option D is incorrect. DataSync would consume the 500 Mbps internet connection, taking approximately 16 days, and is slower than Snowball for bulk data migration. Therefore, A, Order AWS Snowball devices to transfer the data. Use a lifecycle policy to transition the files to Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:08:50 Question 24. A company uses an organization in AWS Organizations to manage AWS accounts that contain applications. The company sets up a dedicated monitoring member account in the organization. The company wants to query and visualize observability data across the accounts by using Amazon CloudWatch. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Enable CloudWatch cross-account observability for the monitoring account. Deploy an AWS CloudFormation template provided by the monitoring account in each AWS account to share the data with the monitoring account. Option B. Set up service control policies (SCPs) to provide access to CloudWatch in the monitoring account under the Organizations root organizational unit (OU). Option C. Configure a new IAM user in the monitoring account. In each AWS account, configure an IAM policy to have access to query and visualize the CloudWatch data in the account. Attach the new IAM policy to the new IAM user. Option D. Create a new IAM user in the monitoring account. Create cross-account IAM policies in each AWS account. Attach the IAM policies to the new IAM user. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Enable CloudWatch cross-account observability for the monitoring account. Deploy an AWS CloudFormation template provided by the monitoring account in each AWS account to share the data with the monitoring account. AWS CloudWatch cross-account observability is the native AWS feature designed specifically for this use case. It allows a central monitoring account to query and visualize observability data across multiple accounts in an organization. The monitoring account enables the feature, and then CloudFormation templates are deployed in member accounts to establish the trust relationship and data sharing, enabling centralized dashboards and monitoring across the entire organization. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. SCPs manage permissions at the organization level but do not enable cross-account CloudWatch data sharing or observability. Option C is incorrect. Creating individual IAM users and policies for each account doesn't leverage the native cross-account observability feature and creates unnecessary management overhead. Option D is incorrect. Manually creating cross-account IAM policies doesn't use the CloudWatch cross-account observability feature and is more complex than the built-in solution. Therefore, A, Enable CloudWatch cross-account observability for the monitoring account. Deploy an AWS CloudFormation template provided by the monitoring account in each AWS account to share the data with the monitoring account, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:12:01 Question 25. A solutions architect needs to allow team members to access Amazon S3 buckets in two different AWS accounts: a development account and a production account. The team currently has access to S3 buckets in the development account by using unique IAM users that are assigned to an IAM group that has appropriate permissions in the account. The solutions architect has created an IAM role in the production account. The role has a policy that grants access to an S3 bucket in the production account. Which solution will meet these requirements while complying with the principle of least privilege? Here are the options. Option A. Attach the Administrator Access policy to the development account users. Option B. Add the development account as a principal in the trust policy of the role in the production account. Option C. Turn off the S3 Block Public Access feature on the S3 bucket in the production account. Option D. Create a user in the production account with unique credentials for each team member. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Add the development account as a principal in the trust policy of the role in the production account. Adding the development account as a principal in the trust policy of the production role allows IAM users from the development account to assume the role in the production account. This leverages existing IAM user management in the development account while granting precisely defined permissions through the role in production. This approach adheres to least privilege by only granting the specific permissions defined in the role's policy, avoiding over-permissive policies or creating duplicate user credentials. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Administrator Access is overly permissive and violates the principle of least privilege. Option C is incorrect. Disabling Block Public Access makes buckets vulnerable to public exposure, contrary to security best practices. Option D is incorrect. Creating duplicate users in production violates the principle of least privilege and creates unnecessary account management overhead. Therefore, B, Add the development account as a principal in the trust policy of the role in the production account, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:14:36 Question 26. A company is migrating applications from an on-premises Microsoft Active Directory that the company manages to AWS. The company deploys the applications in multiple AWS accounts. The company uses AWS Organizations to manage the accounts centrally. The company's security team needs a single sign-on solution across all the company's AWS accounts. The company must continue to manage users and groups that are in the on-premises Active Directory. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Enterprise Edition Active Directory in AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. Configure the Active Directory to be the identity source for AWS IAM Identity Center. Option B. Enable AWS IAM Identity Center. Configure a two-way forest trust relationship to connect the company's self-managed Active Directory with IAM Identity Center by using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. Option C. Use AWS Directory Service and create a two-way trust relationship with the company's self-managed Active Directory. Option D. Deploy an identity provider (IdP) on Amazon EC2. Link the IdP as an identity source within AWS IAM Identity Center. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Enable AWS IAM Identity Center. Configure a two-way forest trust relationship to connect the company's self-managed Active Directory with IAM Identity Center by using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory. Option B correctly establishes a two-way forest trust relationship between the on-premises self-managed Active Directory and AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory, which is then integrated with IAM Identity Center for single sign-on across multiple AWS accounts. This preserves existing user and group management on-premises while enabling SSO across the organization. Option A creates a new AWS-managed directory instead of using the existing on-premises one. Option C creates a trust relationship but doesn't integrate with IAM Identity Center for SSO. Option D uses an external IdP which unnecessarily replaces the existing Active Directory infrastructure. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Creating a new Enterprise Edition directory duplicates infrastructure and doesn't maintain the existing on-premises Active Directory as the source of truth. Option C is incorrect. A two-way trust alone doesn't provide single sign-on capability across AWS accounts without IAM Identity Center integration. Option D is incorrect. Deploying an identity provider on EC2 duplicates infrastructure and abandons the existing managed Active Directory investment. Therefore, B, Enable AWS IAM Identity Center. Configure a two-way forest trust relationship to connect the company's self-managed Active Directory with IAM Identity Center by using AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:18:10 Question 27. A company hosts a containerized web application on a fleet of on-premises servers that process incoming requests. The number of requests is growing quickly. The on-premises servers cannot handle the increased number of requests. The company wants to move the application to AWS with minimum code changes and minimum development effort. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS Fargate on Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) to run the containerized web application with Service Auto Scaling. Use an Application Load Balancer to distribute the incoming requests. Option B. Use two Amazon EC2 instances to host the containerized web application. Use an Application Load Balancer to distribute the incoming requests. Option C. Use AWS Lambda with a new code that uses one of the supported languages. Create multiple Lambda functions to support the load. Use Amazon API Gateway as an entry point to the Lambda functions. Option D. Use a high performance computing (HPC) solution such as AWS ParallelCluster to establish an HPC cluster that can process the incoming requests at the appropriate scale. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Use AWS Fargate on Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) to run the containerized web application with Service Auto Scaling. Use an Application Load Balancer to distribute the incoming requests. AWS Fargate on ECS with Service Auto Scaling provides the least operational overhead for containerized applications. Fargate eliminates EC2 instance management, Application Load Balancer handles request distribution, and Service Auto Scaling automatically adjusts capacity based on demand. This requires minimal code changes since the application runs in its existing container format. EC2 requires instance management; Lambda requires code rewrite; HPC is unnecessary for web request processing. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Fixed EC2 instances require manual capacity planning and instance management, and cannot scale to meet growing request volume automatically. Option C is incorrect. Lambda requires rewriting the application in a supported language, violating the 'minimum code changes' requirement. Option D is incorrect. HPC solutions like ParallelCluster are designed for scientific computing workloads, not for scaling web application request processing. Therefore, A, Use AWS Fargate on Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) to run the containerized web application with Service Auto Scaling. Use an Application Load Balancer to distribute the incoming requests, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:21:21 Question 28. A company is required to use cryptographic keys in its on-premises key manager. The key manager is outside of the AWS Cloud because of regulatory and compliance requirements. The company wants to manage encryption and decryption by using cryptographic keys that are retained outside of the AWS Cloud and that support a variety of external key managers from different vendors. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS CloudHSM key store backed by a CloudHSM cluster. Option B. Use an AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) external key store backed by an external key manager. Option C. Use the default AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) managed key store. Option D. Use a custom key store backed by an AWS CloudHSM cluster. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use an AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) external key store backed by an external key manager. AWS Key Management Service (KMS) external key store (XKS) is purpose-built to meet regulatory requirements by allowing cryptographic keys to remain outside AWS while supporting multiple external key manager vendors. It requires the least operational overhead compared to alternatives, as it integrates seamlessly with AWS services without requiring custom key store setup or CloudHSM cluster management. CloudHSM requires provisioning and managing clusters, and the default KMS managed key store keeps keys within AWS, violating the compliance requirement. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. CloudHSM key store backed by a CloudHSM cluster requires significant provisioning and operational management. Option C is incorrect. The default KMS managed key store stores keys in AWS, not outside the cloud, violating the compliance requirement. Option D is incorrect. Custom key stores backed by CloudHSM require cluster provisioning and management; XKS is simpler and supports more vendors. Therefore, B, Use an AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) external key store backed by an external key manager, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:24:04 Question 29. A solutions architect is designing a company’s disaster recovery (DR) architecture. The company has a MySQL database that runs on an Amazon EC2 instance in a private subnet with scheduled backup. The DR design needs to include multiple AWS Regions. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Migrate the MySQL database to multiple EC2 instances. Configure a standby EC2 instance in the DR Region. Turn on replication. Option B. Migrate the MySQL database to Amazon RDS. Use a Multi-AZ deployment. Turn on read replication for the primary DB instance in the different Availability Zones. Option C. Migrate the MySQL database to an Amazon Aurora global database. Host the primary DB cluster in the primary Region. Host the secondary DB cluster in the DR Region. Option D. Store the scheduled backup of the MySQL database in an Amazon S3 bucket that is configured for S3 Cross-Region Replication (CRR). Use the data backup to restore the database in the DR Region. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Migrate the MySQL database to an Amazon Aurora global database. Host the primary DB cluster in the primary Region. Host the secondary DB cluster in the DR Region. Amazon Aurora global database provides the least operational overhead for multi-region MySQL disaster recovery. It automatically handles replication across regions, provides near-zero RTO/RPO, and requires no manual configuration of replication. Unlike RDS Multi-AZ which only covers availability zones within a single region, Aurora global database natively spans multiple AWS Regions with read-only secondary clusters that can be promoted to primary in a DR event. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Manual EC2 replication setup requires significant operational overhead, custom scripting, and ongoing monitoring. Option B is incorrect. RDS Multi-AZ only provides high availability within a single region, not multi-region DR capability. Option D is incorrect. Restoring from S3 backups requires manual intervention and extended recovery time, making it unsuitable for a DR solution. Therefore, C, Migrate the MySQL database to an Amazon Aurora global database. Host the primary DB cluster in the primary Region. Host the secondary DB cluster in the DR Region, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:27:08 Question 30. A company runs demonstration environments for its customers on Amazon EC2 instances. Each environment is isolated in its own VPC. The company’s operations team needs to be notified when RDP or SSH access to an environment has been established. Here are the options. Option A. Configure Amazon CloudWatch Application Insights to create AWS Systems Manager OpsItems when RDP or SSH access is detected. Option B. Configure the EC2 instances with an IAM instance profile that has an IAM role with the AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore policy attached. Option C. Publish VPC flow logs to Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Create required metric filters. Create an Amazon CloudWatch metric alarm with a notification action for when the alarm is in the ALARM state. Option D. Configure an Amazon EventBridge rule to listen for events of type EC2 Instance State-change Notification. Configure an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic as a target. Subscribe the operations team to the topic. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Publish VPC flow logs to Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Create required metric filters. Create an Amazon CloudWatch metric alarm with a notification action for when the alarm is in the ALARM state. VPC Flow Logs capture all network traffic flowing in and out of network interfaces, including RDP (port 3389) and SSH (port 22) connections. By publishing these logs to CloudWatch Logs, creating metric filters for these specific ports, and setting CloudWatch alarms with SNS notifications, the operations team receives real-time alerts whenever RDP or SSH access is established. This is the most direct and reliable method for detecting access events. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. CloudWatch Application Insights monitors application performance, not specific network access events like RDP or SSH connections. Option B is incorrect. The AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore policy enables AWS Systems Manager Session Manager access, which doesn't notify on RDP/SSH access from external sources. Option D is incorrect. EC2 Instance State-change Notifications only trigger when instances change state (start, stop, terminate), not when users establish RDP or SSH sessions. Therefore, C, Publish VPC flow logs to Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Create required metric filters. Create an Amazon CloudWatch metric alarm with a notification action for when the alarm is in the ALARM state, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:30:26 Question 31. A company hosts a website analytics application on a single Amazon EC2 On-Demand Instance. The analytics application is highly resilient and is designed to run in stateless mode. The company notices that the application is showing signs of performance degradation during busy times and is presenting 5xx errors. The company needs to make the application scale seamlessly. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of the web application. Use the AMI to launch a second EC2 On-Demand Instance. Use an Application Load Balancer to distribute the load across the two EC2 instances. Option B. Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of the web application. Use the AMI to launch a second EC2 On-Demand Instance. Use Amazon Route 53 weighted routing to distribute the load across the two EC2 instances. Option C. Create an AWS Lambda function to stop the EC2 instance and change the instance type. Create an Amazon CloudWatch alarm to invoke the Lambda function when CPU utilization is more than 75%. Option D. Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of the web application. Apply the AMI to a launch template. Create an Auto Scaling group that includes the launch template. Configure the launch template to use a Spot Fleet. Attach an Application Load Balancer to the Auto Scaling group. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of the web application. Apply the AMI to a launch template. Create an Auto Scaling group that includes the launch template. Configure the launch template to use a Spot Fleet. Attach an Application Load Balancer to the Auto Scaling group. Option D provides seamless auto-scaling at minimal cost using Auto Scaling groups with Spot Instances. Since the application is stateless and resilient, it can leverage Spot Fleet for significant cost savings (up to 90% less than On-Demand). The Auto Scaling group automatically scales instances based on demand, and the ALB distributes traffic. This handles the performance degradation and 5xx errors while maintaining cost-effectiveness. Option A uses only two On-Demand instances with no auto-scaling. Option B uses Route 53 weighted routing which requires manual instance management. Option C stops/changes instance type causing downtime. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Manual scaling with two fixed instances doesn't automatically handle traffic spikes and provides no seamless scaling. Option B is incorrect. Route 53 weighted routing doesn't provide automatic scaling and requires manual instance management. Option C is incorrect. Stopping and changing instance types causes downtime and isn't seamless scaling. Therefore, D, Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of the web application. Apply the AMI to a launch template. Create an Auto Scaling group that includes the launch template. Configure the launch template to use a Spot Fleet. Attach an Application Load Balancer to the Auto Scaling group, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:34:15 Question 32. A company has migrated several applications to AWS in the past 3 months. The company wants to know the breakdown of costs for each of these applications. The company wants to receive a regular report that includes this information. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS Budgets to download data for the past 3 months into a .csv file. Look up the desired information. Option B. Load AWS Cost and Usage Reports into an Amazon RDS DB instance. Run SQL queries to get the desired information. Option C. Tag all the AWS resources with a key for cost and a value of the application's name. Activate cost allocation tags. Use Cost Explorerto get the desired information. Option D. Tag all the AWS resources with a key for cost and a value of the application's name. Use the AWS Billing and Cost Management console todownload bills for the past 3 months. Look up the desired information. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Tag all the AWS resources with a key for cost and a value of the application's name. Activate cost allocation tags. Use Cost Explorerto get the desired information. Using cost allocation tags on all resources, activating them in the billing system, and leveraging Cost Explorer provides an automated, scalable, and cost-effective solution for ongoing cost tracking by application. Cost Explorer dynamically analyzes tagged resources and generates reports without additional storage or processing infrastructure, making it ideal for regular reporting with minimal operational overhead and no additional AWS service costs. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Downloading CSV files is a one-time manual process that does not provide regular automated reporting and requires repeated manual effort. Option B is incorrect. Loading Cost and Usage Reports into an RDS instance incurs database costs and requires manual SQL query maintenance, adding unnecessary operational and financial overhead. Option D is incorrect. Downloading bills manually every month is operationally inefficient and does not scale; tags enable automated, dynamic reporting through Cost Explorer without manual downloads. Therefore, C, Tag all the AWS resources with a key for cost and a value of the application's name. Activate cost allocation tags. Use Cost Explorerto get the desired information, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:37:22 Question 33. A company hosts a database that runs on an Amazon RDS instance that is deployed to multiple Availability Zones. The company periodically runs a script against the database to report new entries that are added to the database. The script that runs against the database negatively affects the performance of a critical application. The company needs to improve application performance with minimal costs. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Add functionality to the script to identify the instance that has the fewest active connections. Configure the script to read from that instance to report the total new entries. Option B. Create a read replica of the database. Configure the script to query only the read replica to report the total new entries. Option C. Instruct the development team to manually export the new entries for the day in the database at the end of each day. Option D. Use Amazon ElastiCache to cache the common queries that the script runs against the database. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Create a read replica of the database. Configure the script to query only the read replica to report the total new entries. Creating a read replica of the RDS database and directing the reporting script to query only the read replica offloads read traffic from the primary instance, improving application performance with minimal operational overhead. Read replicas are automatically managed, cost-effective, and require no code changes beyond pointing the script to the replica endpoint. This approach is simpler and more scalable than identifying connections, manual exports, or caching. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Querying based on active connection count adds operational complexity and still places load on production instances. Option C is incorrect. Manual daily exports are operationally intensive, error-prone, and do not scale as data volume grows. Option D is incorrect. ElastiCache adds complexity, requires application changes to use caching logic, and is unnecessary when read replicas can handle reporting queries. Therefore, B, Create a read replica of the database. Configure the script to query only the read replica to report the total new entries, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:40:06 Question 34. A solutions architect manages an analytics application. The application stores large amounts of semistructured data in an Amazon S3 bucket. The solutions architect wants to use parallel data processing to process the data more quickly. The solutions architect also wants to use information that is stored in an Amazon Redshift database to enrich the data. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use Amazon Athena to process the S3 data. Use AWS Glue with the Amazon Redshift data to enrich the S3 data. Option B. Use Amazon EMR to process the S3 data. Use Amazon EMR with the Amazon Redshift data to enrich the S3 data. Option C. Use Amazon EMR to process the S3 data. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Streams to move the S3 data into Amazon Redshift so that the data can be enriched. Option D. Use AWS Glue to process the S3 data. Use AWS Lake Formation with the Amazon Redshift data to enrich the S3 data. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use Amazon EMR to process the S3 data. Use Amazon EMR with the Amazon Redshift data to enrich the S3 data. Amazon EMR is the primary service for parallel processing of large semistructured data in S3, providing distributed computing capabilities. EMR can also connect to Amazon Redshift to enrich data, making it the best choice for both parallel processing and data enrichment from Redshift in a single solution. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Amazon Athena is designed for SQL queries on S3 data but lacks native parallel processing for complex transformations and cannot efficiently integrate with Redshift for enrichment. Option C is incorrect. While EMR can process data, using Kinesis Data Streams for enrichment is inefficient; direct Redshift integration with EMR is more appropriate. Option D is incorrect. AWS Glue is an ETL service but is less suitable for large-scale parallel processing compared to EMR, and Lake Formation adds unnecessary complexity. Therefore, B, Use Amazon EMR to process the S3 data. Use Amazon EMR with the Amazon Redshift data to enrich the S3 data, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:43:05 Question 35. A company has a mobile app for customers. The app’s data is sensitive and must be encrypted at rest. The company uses AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS). The company needs a solution that prevents the accidental deletion of KMS keys. The solution must use Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) to send an email notification to administrators when a user attempts to delete a KMS key. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Amazon EventBridge rule that reacts when a user tries to delete a KMS key. Configure an AWS Config rule that cancels any deletion of a KMS key. Add the AWS Config rule as a target of the EventBridge rule. Create an SNS topic that notifies the administrators. Option B. Create an AWS Lambda function that has custom logic to prevent KMS key deletion. Create an Amazon CloudWatch alarm that is activated when a user tries to delete a KMS key. Create an Amazon EventBridge rule that invokes the Lambda function when the DeleteKey operation is performed. Create an SNS topic. Configure the EventBridge rule to publish an SNS message that notifies the administrators. Option C. Create an Amazon EventBridge rule that reacts when the KMS DeleteKey operation is performed. Configure the rule to initiate an AWS Systems Manager Automation runbook. Configure the runbook to cancel the deletion of the KMS key. Create an SNS topic. Configure the EventBridge rule to publish an SNS message that notifies the administrators. Option D. Create an AWS CloudTrail trail. Configure the trail to deliver logs to a new Amazon CloudWatch log group. Create a CloudWatch alarm based on the metric filter for the CloudWatch log group. Configure the alarm to use Amazon SNS to notify the administrators when the KMS DeleteKey operation is performed. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create an Amazon EventBridge rule that reacts when the KMS DeleteKey operation is performed. Configure the rule to initiate an AWS Systems Manager Automation runbook. Configure the runbook to cancel the deletion of the KMS key. Create an SNS topic. Configure the EventBridge rule to publish an SNS message that notifies the administrators. EventBridge detecting the DeleteKey operation with a Systems Manager Automation runbook provides the least operational overhead. The runbook can directly cancel the KMS key deletion through native AWS capabilities, while EventBridge simultaneously publishes SNS notifications. This approach avoids the complexity of custom Lambda logic (Option B) and Config rules (Option A), and is more actionable than CloudTrail logs with alarms that only monitor (Option D). The solution is automated, scalable, and requires minimal custom code. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. AWS Config rules are designed for compliance checking, not for actively preventing operations; this approach is less direct. Option B is incorrect. Custom Lambda functions add unnecessary operational overhead and complexity for what AWS Systems Manager can handle natively. Option D is incorrect. CloudTrail with CloudWatch alarms only provides notification after the fact; it does not prevent deletion, only monitors it. Therefore, C, Create an Amazon EventBridge rule that reacts when the KMS DeleteKey operation is performed. Configure the rule to initiate an AWS Systems Manager Automation runbook. Configure the runbook to cancel the deletion of the KMS key. Create an SNS topic. Configure the EventBridge rule to publish an SNS message that notifies the administrators, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:47:19 Question 36. A company runs a stateful production application on Amazon EC2 instances. The application requires at least two EC2 instances to always be running. A solutions architect needs to design a highly available and fault-tolerant architecture for the application. The solutions architect creates an Auto Scaling group of EC2 instances. Which set of additional steps should the solutions architect take to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Set the Auto Scaling group's minimum capacity to two. Deploy one On-Demand Instance in one Availability Zone and one On-Demand Instance in a second Availability Zone. Option B. Set the Auto Scaling group's minimum capacity to four. Deploy two On-Demand Instances in one Availability Zone and two On-Demand Instances in a second Availability Zone. Option C. Set the Auto Scaling group's minimum capacity to two. Deploy four Spot Instances in one Availability Zone. Option D. Set the Auto Scaling group's minimum capacity to four. Deploy two On-Demand Instances in one Availability Zone and two Spot Instances in a second Availability Zone. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Set the Auto Scaling group's minimum capacity to two. Deploy one On-Demand Instance in one Availability Zone and one On-Demand Instance in a second Availability Zone. For a stateful production application requiring at least two running instances with high availability and fault tolerance, setting the minimum capacity to two and deploying one On- Demand instance in each of two different Availability Zones is the correct approach. This ensures the application can survive an AZ failure while maintaining the minimum required instances at the lowest cost. On-Demand instances are preferred for stateful applications where availability cannot be compromised. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Setting minimum capacity to four when only two instances are required wastes resources and increases costs unnecessarily. Option C is incorrect. Deploying all four Spot Instances in a single Availability Zone defeats the purpose of high availability across AZs, and Spot instances can be interrupted without notice. Option D is incorrect. Mixing On-Demand and Spot instances violates the high-availability requirement, as Spot instances can be terminated, potentially dropping below the required minimum. Therefore, A, Set the Auto Scaling group's minimum capacity to two. Deploy one On-Demand Instance in one Availability Zone and one On-Demand Instance in a second Availability Zone, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:50:21 Question 37. A company has an on-premises MySQL database used by the global sales team with infrequent access patterns. The sales team requires the database to have minimal downtime. A database administrator wants to migrate this database to AWS without selecting a particular instance type in anticipation of more users in the future. Which service should a solutions architect recommend? Here are the options. Option A. Amazon Aurora MySQL. Option B. Amazon Aurora Serverless for MySQL. Option C. Amazon Redshift Spectrum. Option D. Amazon RDS for MySQL. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Amazon Aurora Serverless for MySQL. Amazon Aurora Serverless for MySQL is ideal because it automatically scales compute capacity based on actual demand without requiring users to select or manage a specific instance type. This is perfect for the infrequent access patterns described, as it scales down to minimal capacity during idle periods and scales up when needed, reducing costs. Serverless also provides minimal downtime during migration and meets the requirement of not committing to a particular instance type in anticipation of growth. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Aurora MySQL requires selecting and provisioning specific instance types upfront, not meeting the requirement to avoid selecting a particular instance type. Option C is incorrect. Redshift Spectrum is designed for querying large datasets in S3 for analytics, not for hosting transactional databases used by sales teams. Option D is incorrect. RDS for MySQL requires manual instance selection and capacity planning upfront, not meeting the requirement to avoid committing to a specific instance type. Therefore, B, Amazon Aurora Serverless for MySQL, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:52:43 Question 38. A company is migrating its on-premises workload to the AWS Cloud. The company already uses several Amazon EC2 instances and Amazon RDS DB instances. The company wants a solution that automatically starts and stops the EC2 instances and DB instances outside of business hours. The solution must minimize cost and infrastructure maintenance. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Scale the EC2 instances by using elastic resize. Scale the DB instances to zero outside of business hours. Option B. Explore AWS Marketplace for partner solutions that will automatically start and stop the EC2 instances and DB instances on a schedule. Option C. Launch another EC2 instance. Configure a crontab schedule to run shell scripts that will start and stop the existing EC2 instances and DB instances on a schedule. Option D. Create an AWS Lambda function that will start and stop the EC2 instances and DB instances. Configure Amazon EventBridge to invoke the Lambda function on a schedule. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Create an AWS Lambda function that will start and stop the EC2 instances and DB instances. Configure Amazon EventBridge to invoke the Lambda function on a schedule. AWS Lambda with EventBridge is the most cost-effective and maintenance-minimal solution for automatically starting and stopping EC2 and RDS instances on a schedule. Lambda eliminates the need to maintain additional infrastructure (unlike option C which requires launching and maintaining another EC2 instance), and it's a native AWS service that integrates seamlessly with EventBridge for cron-based scheduling. This approach requires minimal code changes and no third-party marketplace solutions. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Elastic resize and scaling to zero are not standard AWS features for EC2/RDS; this option misrepresents AWS capabilities. Option B is incorrect. Marketplace solutions add unnecessary cost and vendor dependency when native AWS services can accomplish the task more cost-effectively. Option C is incorrect. Launching an additional EC2 instance with crontab increases infrastructure maintenance overhead and infrastructure costs, contradicting the requirement to minimize both. Therefore, D, Create an AWS Lambda function that will start and stop the EC2 instances and DB instances. Configure Amazon EventBridge to invoke the Lambda function on a schedule, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:55:59 Question 39. A company needs to integrate with a third-party data feed. The data feed sends a webhook to notify an external service when new data is ready for consumption. A developer wrote an AWS Lambda function to retrieve data when the company receives a webhook callback. The developer must make the Lambda function available for the third party to call. Which solution will meet these requirements with the MOST operational efficiency? Here are the options. Option A. Create a function URL for the Lambda function. Provide the Lambda function URL to the third party for the webhook. Option B. Deploy an Application Load Balancer (ALB) in front of the Lambda function. Provide the ALB URL to the third party for the webhook. Option C. Create an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic. Attach the topic to the Lambda function. Provide the public hostname of the SNS topic to the third party for the webhook. Option D. Create an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue. Attach the queue to the Lambda function. Provide the public hostname of the SQS queue to the third party for the webhook. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Create a function URL for the Lambda function. Provide the Lambda function URL to the third party for the webhook. Lambda Function URLs provide a simple, direct HTTPS endpoint for the Lambda function without additional infrastructure. Launched specifically to address webhook scenarios, they require minimal setup and operational overhead, no load balancer, queue, or topic configuration needed. The third party simply calls the provided URL. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. ALB adds unnecessary infrastructure complexity and operational overhead compared to a direct Function URL. Option C is incorrect. SNS is a pub/sub service and doesn't expose a direct webhook endpoint; requires additional integration layers. Option D is incorrect. SQS is asynchronous queueing, not a direct webhook receiver; doesn't provide a public URL for webhooks. Therefore, A, Create a function URL for the Lambda function. Provide the Lambda function URL to the third party for the webhook, is the correct answer.
Play from 1:58:47 Question 40. A company built an application with Docker containers and needs to run the application in the AWS Cloud. The company wants to use a managed service to host the application. The solution must scale in and out appropriately according to demand on the individual container services. The solution also must not result in additional operational overhead or infrastructure to manage. Which solutions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with AWS Fargate. Option B. Use Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) with AWS Fargate. Option C. Provision an Amazon API Gateway API. Connect the API to AWS Lambda to run the containers. Option D. Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with Amazon EC2 worker nodes. Option E. Use Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) with Amazon EC2 worker nodes. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are A. Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with AWS Fargate, and B. Use Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) with AWS Fargate. Both Amazon ECS with Fargate and Amazon EKS with Fargate are fully managed container orchestration platforms that automatically scale containers based on demand without requiring infrastructure management. Fargate eliminates the need to provision or manage EC2 instances, providing complete serverless container deployment. Both support Docker containers and handle scaling transparently. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option C is incorrect. API Gateway and Lambda cannot directly run Docker containers; Lambda requires code packages, not container images in the traditional sense. Option D is incorrect. ECS with EC2 worker nodes requires managing EC2 instances, patching, scaling policies, and cluster infrastructure-adding operational overhead. Option E is incorrect. EKS with EC2 worker nodes requires managing Kubernetes clusters, node groups, updates, and infrastructure-significant operational burden. Therefore, A and B are the correct answers.
Play from 2:01:36 Question 41. A company is running a custom application on Amazon EC2 On-Demand Instances. The application has frontend nodes that need to run 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and backend nodes that need to run only for a short time based on workload. The number of backend nodes varies during the day. The company needs to scale out and scale in more instances based on workload. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Use Reserved Instances for the frontend nodes. Use AWS Fargate for the backend nodes. Option B. Use Reserved Instances for the frontend nodes. Use Spot Instances for the backend nodes. Option C. Use Spot Instances for the frontend nodes. Use Reserved Instances for the backend nodes. Option D. Use Spot Instances for the frontend nodes. Use AWS Fargate for the backend nodes. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use Reserved Instances for the frontend nodes. Use Spot Instances for the backend nodes. Reserved Instances provide the lowest cost for the frontend nodes that run continuously 24/7, while Spot Instances offer up to 90% savings for the variable backend workload that scales in and out based on demand. This combination optimizes costs by matching instance types to their usage patterns. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. AWS Fargate would be more expensive than Spot Instances for variable backend workloads and is container-focused, not traditional EC2. Option C is incorrect. Using Spot Instances for always-on frontend nodes risks interruption and is unreliable; Reserved Instances are appropriate for frontend. Option D is incorrect. Spot Instances for frontend workload is unreliable, and Fargate adds unnecessary cost compared to Spot for backend nodes. Therefore, B, Use Reserved Instances for the frontend nodes. Use Spot Instances for the backend nodes, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:04:08 Question 42. A company has an application that ingests incoming messages. Dozens of other applications and microservices then quickly consume these messages. The number of messages varies drastically and sometimes increases suddenly to 100,000 each second. The company wants to decouple the solution and increase scalability. Which solution meets these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Persist the messages to Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics. Configure the consumer applications to read and process the messages. Option B. Deploy the ingestion application on Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group to scale the number of EC2 instances based on CPU metrics. Option C. Write the messages to Amazon Kinesis Data Streams with a single shard. Use an AWS Lambda function to preprocess messages and store them in Amazon DynamoDB. Configure the consumer applications to read from DynamoDB to process the messages. Option D. Publish the messages to an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic with multiple Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SOS) subscriptions. Configure the consumer applications to process the messages from the queues. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Publish the messages to an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic with multiple Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SOS) subscriptions. Configure the consumer applications to process the messages from the queues. Amazon SQS provides durable message queuing that decouples producers from consumers, and SNS with multiple SQS subscriptions enables multiple independent consumer applications to process the same messages. This architecture naturally scales to handle sudden spikes to 100,000 messages per second and allows each consumer application to scale independently. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Kinesis Data Analytics is for stream processing and analysis, not for decoupling and fan-out to multiple independent consumer applications. Option B is incorrect. Auto Scaling EC2 based on CPU does not decouple the ingestion from consumption and doesn't address the fan-out requirement for multiple consumers. Option C is incorrect. Single Kinesis shard is a bottleneck for 100,000 messages per second, and DynamoDB adds unnecessary storage complexity when a queue is the appropriate pattern. Therefore, D, Publish the messages to an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic with multiple Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SOS) subscriptions. Configure the consumer applications to process the messages from the queues, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:07:20 Question 43. A company is developing a mobile gaming app in a single AWS Region. The app runs on multiple Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. The company stores the app data in Amazon DynamoDB. The app communicates by using TCP traffic and UDP traffic between the users and the servers. The application will be used globally. The company wants to ensure the lowest possible latency for all users. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS Global Accelerator to create an accelerator. Create an Application Load Balancer (ALB) behind an accelerator endpoint that uses Global Accelerator integration and listening on the TCP and UDP ports. Update the Auto Scaling group to register instances on the ALB. Option B. Use AWS Global Accelerator to create an accelerator. Create a Network Load Balancer (NLB) behind an accelerator endpoint that uses Global Accelerator integration and listening on the TCP and UDP ports. Update the Auto Scaling group to register instances on the NLB. Option C. Create an Amazon CloudFront content delivery network (CDN) endpoint. Create a Network Load Balancer (NLB) behind the endpoint and listening on the TCP and UDP ports. Update the Auto Scaling group to register instances on the NLB. Update CloudFront to use the NLB as the origin. Option D. Create an Amazon CloudFront content delivery network (CDN) endpoint. Create an Application Load Balancer (ALB) behind the endpoint and listening on the TCP and UDP ports. Update the Auto Scaling group to register instances on the ALB. Update CloudFront to use the ALB as the origin. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use AWS Global Accelerator to create an accelerator. Create a Network Load Balancer (NLB) behind an accelerator endpoint that uses Global Accelerator integration and listening on the TCP and UDP ports. Update the Auto Scaling group to register instances on the NLB. AWS Global Accelerator with a Network Load Balancer (NLB) is the correct solution for global gaming applications requiring both TCP and UDP traffic with minimal latency. Global Accelerator routes traffic through AWS's private global network to the nearest edge location, and NLB supports both TCP and UDP protocols. CloudFront (C, D) is designed for HTTP/HTTPS content delivery, not for gaming protocols requiring TCP and UDP support. ALB (A) does not support UDP, making it unsuitable for games that use UDP for real-time communication. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. ALB does not support UDP protocol, which is essential for real-time gaming applications requiring low latency. Option C is incorrect. CloudFront is for HTTP/HTTPS content delivery, not for TCP/UDP gaming traffic, and NLB behind CloudFront is not a valid configuration. Option D is incorrect. CloudFront does not support UDP, and ALB behind CloudFront cannot handle gaming protocols; this configuration is also not supported. Therefore, B, Use AWS Global Accelerator to create an accelerator. Create a Network Load Balancer (NLB) behind an accelerator endpoint that uses Global Accelerator integration and listening on the TCP and UDP ports. Update the Auto Scaling group to register instances on the NLB, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:11:25 Question 44. A social media company has workloads that collect and process data. The workloads store the data in on-premises NFS storage. The data store cannot scale fast enough to meet the company’s expanding business needs. The company wants to migrate the current data store to AWS. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Set up an AWS Storage Gateway Volume Gateway. Use an Amazon S3 Lifecycle policy to transition the data to the appropriate storage class. Option B. Set up an AWS Storage Gateway Amazon S3 File Gateway. Use an Amazon S3 Lifecycle policy to transition the data to the appropriate storage class. Option C. Use the Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) Standard-Infrequent Access (Standard-IA) storage class. Activate the infrequent access lifecycle policy. Option D. Use the Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) One Zone-Infrequent Access (One Zone-IA) storage class. Activate the infrequent access lifecycle policy. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Set up an AWS Storage Gateway Amazon S3 File Gateway. Use an Amazon S3 Lifecycle policy to transition the data to the appropriate storage class. AWS Storage Gateway S3 File Gateway presents S3 as NFS storage, providing seamless migration from on-premises NFS while leveraging S3's scalability and cost-efficiency. S3 Lifecycle policies transition infrequent data to cheaper storage classes (Glacier, Deep Archive). Volume Gateway is block-based, less suitable for NFS workloads. EFS is more expensive than S3 for large-scale storage and lacks the lifecycle transition flexibility needed for cost optimization. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Volume Gateway provides block storage, not NFS compatibility, and is generally more costly than S3. Option C is incorrect. EFS Standard-IA is more expensive than S3 with Lifecycle policies for long-term storage needs. Option D is incorrect. EFS One Zone-IA is regional and more expensive than S3-based solutions, and lacks cross-AZ redundancy benefits. Therefore, B, Set up an AWS Storage Gateway Amazon S3 File Gateway. Use an Amazon S3 Lifecycle policy to transition the data to the appropriate storage class, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:14:29 Question 45. A company’s order system sends requests from clients to Amazon EC2 instances. The EC2 instances process the orders and then store the orders in a database on Amazon RDS. Users report that they must reprocess orders when the system fails. The company wants a resilient solution that can process orders automatically if a system outage occurs. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Move the EC2 instances into an Auto Scaling group. Create an Amazon EventBridge (Amazon CloudWatch Events) rule to target an Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) task. Option B. Move the EC2 instances into an Auto Scaling group behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB). Update the order system to send messages to the ALB endpoint. Option C. Move the EC2 instances into an Auto Scaling group. Configure the order system to send messages to an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue. Configure the EC2 instances to consume messages from the queue. Option D. Create an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic. Create an AWS Lambda function, and subscribe the function to the SNS topic. Configure the order system to send messages to the SNS topic. Send a command to the EC2 instances to process the messages by using AWS Systems Manager Run Command. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Move the EC2 instances into an Auto Scaling group. Configure the order system to send messages to an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue. Configure the EC2 instances to consume messages from the queue. Option C implements a decoupled architecture using Amazon SQS to queue orders, which prevents message loss during outages. EC2 instances consume from the queue, and Auto Scaling ensures capacity for processing. If instances fail, messages remain in the queue for reprocessing without manual intervention. This provides automatic resilience and prevents order reprocessing issues. Option A doesn't address message persistence. Option B doesn't decouple the system. Option D uses SNS which doesn't provide the guaranteed delivery and queuing needed for critical orders. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. EventBridge and ECS don't address message persistence or automatic reprocessing of failed orders. Option B is incorrect. An ALB without message queuing still loses orders during outages; there's no persistence mechanism. Option D is incorrect. SNS is a pub/sub service that doesn't guarantee message persistence for order processing; Lambda execution depends on SNS delivery timing. Therefore, C, Move the EC2 instances into an Auto Scaling group. Configure the order system to send messages to an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue. Configure the EC2 instances to consume messages from the queue, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:18:08 Question 46. A company runs a web application on Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group that has a target group. The company designed the application to work with session affinity (sticky sessions) for a better user experience. The application must be available publicly over the internet as an endpoint. A WAF must be applied to the endpoint for additional security. Session affinity (sticky sessions) must be configured on the endpoint. Which combination of steps will meet these requirements? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Create a public Network Load Balancer. Specify the application target group. Option B. Create a Gateway Load Balancer. Specify the application target group. Option C. Create a public Application Load Balancer. Specify the application target group. Option D. Create a second target group. Add Elastic IP addresses to the EC2 instances. Option E. Create a web ACL in AWS WAF. Associate the web ACL with the endpoint. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are C. Create a public Application Load Balancer. Specify the application target group, and E. Create a web ACL in AWS WAF. Associate the web ACL with the endpoint. Application Load Balancer (ALB) natively supports session affinity/sticky sessions and can be associated with AWS WAF web ACLs for security. ALB is the appropriate choice for web applications requiring sticky sessions and WAF protection. Network Load Balancer does not support sticky sessions in the traditional sense. Gateway Load Balancer is for third-party virtual appliances. A second target group and Elastic IPs do not implement session affinity or meet requirements. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Network Load Balancer does not natively support session affinity for web applications. Option B is incorrect. Gateway Load Balancer is designed for inline inspection by third-party appliances, not web application load balancing. Option D is incorrect. A second target group and Elastic IPs do not implement session affinity functionality. Therefore, C and E are the correct answers.
Play from 2:20:46 Question 47. A company runs its critical storage application in the AWS Cloud. The application uses Amazon S3 in two AWS Regions. The company wants the application to send remote user data to the nearest S3 bucket with no public network congestion. The company also wants the application to fail over with the least amount of management of Amazon S3. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Implement an active-active design between the two Regions. Configure the application to use the regional S3 endpoints closest to the user. Option B. Use an active-passive configuration with S3 Multi-Region Access Points. Create a global endpoint for each of the Regions. Option C. Send user data to the regional S3 endpoints closest to the user. Configure an S3 cross-account replication rule to keep the S3 buckets synchronized. Option D. Set up Amazon S3 to use Multi-Region Access Points in an active-active configuration with a single global endpoint. Configure S3 CrossRegion Replication. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Set up Amazon S3 to use Multi-Region Access Points in an active-active configuration with a single global endpoint. Configure S3 CrossRegion Replication. S3 Multi-Region Access Points provide a single global endpoint that intelligently routes requests to the nearest S3 bucket, eliminating public network congestion and requiring minimal management. When combined with Cross-Region Replication, it creates an active-active configuration with automatic failover capabilities. The global endpoint handles all routing logic automatically, minimizing operational overhead. Option B uses passive configuration, which doesn't meet the active-active requirement. Option A requires manual endpoint management. Option C requires manual cross-account setup with no failover automation. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Manual endpoint selection doesn't provide automatic failover and requires ongoing management of routing logic. Option B is incorrect. Active-passive configuration means only one region serves requests, failing to optimize user proximity and throughput. Option C is incorrect. Cross-account replication requires manual setup and doesn't provide the automatic failover and intelligent routing of Multi-Region Access Points. Therefore, D, Set up Amazon S3 to use Multi-Region Access Points in an active-active configuration with a single global endpoint. Configure S3 CrossRegion Replication, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:23:59 Question 48. A company is running a batch application on Amazon EC2 instances. The application consists of a backend with multiple Amazon RDS databases. The application is causing a high number of reads on the databases. A solutions architect must reduce the number of database reads while ensuring high availability. What should the solutions architect do to meet this requirement? Here are the options. Option A. Add Amazon RDS read replicas. Option B. Use Amazon ElastiCache for Redis. Option C. Use Amazon Route 53 DNS caching. Option D. Use Amazon ElastiCache for Memcached. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Add Amazon RDS read replicas. Amazon RDS read replicas reduce database reads by distributing read traffic across multiple database instances while maintaining high availability. This is the most direct solution for reducing the number of reads on the primary database while ensuring data consistency and HA capabilities. Replicas can be promoted to primaries if needed. Caching solutions like ElastiCache are secondary and require application code changes to implement cache invalidation, whereas read replicas transparently serve read requests. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. ElastiCache for Redis requires application code changes to implement caching logic and cache invalidation, adding complexity. Option C is incorrect. Route 53 DNS caching is not relevant for application-level database read optimization. Option D is incorrect. ElastiCache for Memcached, like Redis, requires application changes and is a secondary caching layer, not a primary solution for database scaling. Therefore, A, Add Amazon RDS read replicas, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:26:15 Question 49. A company hosts an online shopping application that stores all orders in an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL Single-AZ DB instance. Management wants to eliminate single points of failure and has asked a solutions architect to recommend an approach to minimize database downtime without requiring any changes to the application code. Which solution meets these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Convert the existing database instance to a Multi-AZ deployment by modifying the database instance and specifying the Multi-AZ option. Option B. Create a new RDS Multi-AZ deployment. Take a snapshot of the current RDS instance and restore the new Multi-AZ deployment with the snapshot. Option C. Create a read-only replica of the PostgreSQL database in another Availability Zone. Use Amazon Route 53 weighted record sets to distribute requests across the databases. Option D. Place the RDS for PostgreSQL database in an Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling group with a minimum group size of two. Use Amazon Route 53 weighted record sets to distribute requests across instances. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Convert the existing database instance to a Multi-AZ deployment by modifying the database instance and specifying the Multi-AZ option. Converting a Single-AZ RDS instance to Multi-AZ deployment is the simplest solution that requires no application code changes. AWS handles the failover automatically if the primary instance fails, maintaining a standby replica in another AZ. This is a straightforward modification that minimizes downtime and provides the required redundancy. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Creating a new Multi-AZ deployment and restoring from snapshot is unnecessary complexity; the existing instance can be converted directly. Option C is incorrect. Read replicas are not automatic failover targets; weighted routing across replicas requires application awareness and adds manual complexity. Option D is incorrect. RDS databases cannot be placed in Auto Scaling groups; this approach is invalid and would require manual failover management. Therefore, A, Convert the existing database instance to a Multi-AZ deployment by modifying the database instance and specifying the Multi-AZ option, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:29:10 Question 50. An Amazon EC2 instance is located in a private subnet in a new VPC. This subnet does not have outbound internet access, but the EC2 instance needs the ability to download monthly security updates from an outside vendor. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create an internet gateway, and attach it to the VPC. Configure the private subnet route table to use the internet gateway as the default route. Option B. Create a NAT gateway, and place it in a public subnet. Configure the private subnet route table to use the NAT gateway as the default route. Option C. Create a NAT instance, and place it in the same subnet where the EC2 instance is located. Configure the private subnet route table to use the NAT instance as the default route. Option D. Create an internet gateway, and attach it to the VPC. Create a NAT instance, and place it in the same subnet where the EC2 instance is located. Configure the private subnet route table to use the internet gateway as the default route. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Create a NAT gateway, and place it in a public subnet. Configure the private subnet route table to use the NAT gateway as the default route. A NAT gateway placed in a public subnet enables EC2 instances in private subnets to initiate outbound connections to the internet while remaining unreachable from the internet. The private subnet route table routes outbound traffic (0.0.0.0/0) through the NAT gateway. This is the standard AWS architecture for providing outbound internet access from private subnets without exposing instances directly to inbound traffic. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. An internet gateway alone cannot help private subnet traffic reach the internet; IGWs require instances to have public IPs. Option C is incorrect. NAT instances are outdated; they are less reliable and require more operational overhead than NAT gateways. Option D is incorrect. This combination is incorrect; a NAT instance in the same private subnet cannot route its own traffic to itself. Therefore, B, Create a NAT gateway, and place it in a public subnet. Configure the private subnet route table to use the NAT gateway as the default route, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:32:03 Question 51. An Amazon EventBridge rule targets a third-party API. The third-party API has not received any incoming traffic. A solutions architect needs to determine whether the rule conditions are being met and if the rule's target is being invoked. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Check for metrics in Amazon CloudWatch in the namespace for AWS/Events. Option B. Review events in the Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) dead-letter queue. Option C. Check for the events in Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Option D. Check the trails in AWS CloudTrail for the EventBridge events. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Check for metrics in Amazon CloudWatch in the namespace for AWS/Events. CloudWatch metrics in the AWS/Events namespace provide visibility into EventBridge rule invocations, including the number of triggered rules, failed invocations, and dead-letter queue sends. These metrics directly indicate whether rule conditions are being met and if targets are being invoked, making this the proper monitoring solution for EventBridge. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. SQS dead-letter queues only capture messages that fail delivery, not diagnostic information about whether rules are matching or targets are invoked. Option C is incorrect. CloudWatch Logs stores application logs but EventBridge does not natively send event matching diagnostics to CloudWatch Logs by default. Option D is incorrect. CloudTrail logs API calls and AWS service actions but does not provide real-time metrics about whether EventBridge rules are matching conditions or invoking targets. Therefore, A, Check for metrics in Amazon CloudWatch in the namespace for AWS/Events, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:34:22 Question 52. A company runs a web application on Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. The application uses a database that runs on an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL DB instance. The application performs slowly when traffic increases. The database experiences a heavy read load during periods of high traffic. Which actions should a solutions architect take to resolve these performance issues? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Turn on auto scaling for the DB instance. Option B. Create a read replica for the DB instance. Configure the application to send read traffic to the read replica. Option C. Convert the DB instance to a Multi-AZ DB instance deployment. Configure the application to send read traffic to the standby DB instance. Option D. Create an Amazon ElastiCache cluster. Configure the application to cache query results in the ElastiCache cluster. Option E. Configure the Auto Scaling group subnets to ensure that the EC2 instances are provisioned in the same Availability Zone as the DB instance. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are B. Create a read replica for the DB instance. Configure the application to send read traffic to the read replica, and D. Create an Amazon ElastiCache cluster. Configure the application to cache query results in the ElastiCache cluster. Read replicas distribute read traffic away from the primary database, reducing load and improving performance during high traffic periods. ElastiCache caches frequently accessed query results, reducing database load further and improving application response times. Both solutions directly address the heavy read load problem identified in the scenario. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. RDS instances do not support auto scaling; you manually scale the instance class or use read replicas. Option C is incorrect. Multi-AZ provides high availability and failover, not read scaling; the standby instance cannot serve read traffic in a standard Multi-AZ setup. Option E is incorrect. Placing EC2 instances in the same AZ as the database does not address read load issues and can create availability zone concentration risk. Therefore, B and D are the correct answers.
Play from 2:37:07 Question 53. A company has several web servers that need to frequently access a common Amazon RDS MySQL Multi-AZ DB instance. The company wants a secure method for the web servers to connect to the database while meeting a security requirement to rotate user credentials frequently. Which solution meets these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Store the database user credentials in AWS Secrets Manager. Grant the necessary IAM permissions to allow the web servers to access AWS Secrets Manager. Option B. Store the database user credentials in AWS Systems Manager OpsCenter. Grant the necessary IAM permissions to allow the web servers to access OpsCenter. Option C. Store the database user credentials in a secure Amazon S3 bucket. Grant the necessary IAM permissions to allow the web servers to retrieve credentials and access the database. Option D. Store the database user credentials in files encrypted with AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) on the web server file system. The web server should be able to decrypt the files and access the database. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Store the database user credentials in AWS Secrets Manager. Grant the necessary IAM permissions to allow the web servers to access AWS Secrets Manager. AWS Secrets Manager is specifically designed for storing and rotating database credentials securely. It provides automatic rotation, encryption at rest, and fine-grained IAM policies to grant web servers access to retrieve credentials on-demand without embedding them in code. This meets both the security requirement for frequent credential rotation and the requirement for secure, frequent access. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. OpsCenter is designed for operational insights and runbooks, not credential storage; it lacks the automated rotation and security features needed for database credentials. Option C is incorrect. S3 buckets are not designed for sensitive credentials; while encryption is possible, S3 lacks automatic rotation capabilities and imposes greater operational overhead for credential management. Option D is incorrect. Storing credentials on the web server file system is insecure and lacks automated rotation; credentials on disk are vulnerable to compromise if the server is breached. Therefore, A, Store the database user credentials in AWS Secrets Manager. Grant the necessary IAM permissions to allow the web servers to access AWS Secrets Manager, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:40:14 Question 54. A company’s developers want a secure way to gain SSH access on the company's Amazon EC2 instances that run the latest version of Amazon Linux. The developers work remotely and in the corporate office. The company wants to use AWS services as a part of the solution. The EC2 instances are hosted in a VPC private subnet and access the internet through a NAT gateway that is deployed in a public subnet. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Create a bastion host in the same subnet as the EC2 instances. Grant the ec2:CreateVpnConnection IAM permission to the developers. Install EC2 Instance Connect so that the developers can connect to the EC2 instances. Option B. Create an AWS Site-to-Site VPN connection between the corporate network and the VPC. Instruct the developers to use the Site-to-Site VPN connection to access the EC2 instances when the developers are on the corporate network. Instruct the developers to set up another VPN connection for access when they work remotely. Option C. Create a bastion host in the public subnet of the VPConfigure the security groups and SSH keys of the bastion host to only allow connections and SSH authentication from the developers’ corporate and remote networks. Instruct the developers to connect through the bastion host by using SSH to reach the EC2 instances. Option D. Attach the AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore IAM policy to an IAM role that is associated with the EC2 instances. Instruct the developers to use AWS Systems Manager Session Manager to access the EC2 instances. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Attach the AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore IAM policy to an IAM role that is associated with the EC2 instances. Instruct the developers to use AWS Systems Manager Session Manager to access the EC2 instances. AWS Systems Manager Session Manager provides secure, auditable SSH access to EC2 instances without requiring bastion hosts, VPNs, or SSH key management. By attaching the AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore IAM policy to EC2 instances, developers can access instances through Session Manager from anywhere with AWS credentials. This is the most cost-effective solution as it requires no additional infrastructure, provides encryption and audit logging, and works seamlessly with private subnets and NAT gateways. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. EC2 Instance Connect requires internet connectivity on the instance (or a bastion), and the bastion deployment adds unnecessary infrastructure cost. Option B is incorrect. Site-to-Site VPN requires separate VPN connections for remote and office workers, adding complexity and cost. Option C is incorrect. A bastion host requires additional EC2 instance costs, management overhead, and security group configuration compared to Session Manager. Therefore, D, Attach the AmazonSSMManagedInstanceCore IAM policy to an IAM role that is associated with the EC2 instances. Instruct the developers to use AWS Systems Manager Session Manager to access the EC2 instances, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:44:05 Question 55. An IAM user made several configuration changes to AWS resources in their company's account during a production deployment last week. A solutions architect learned that a couple of security group rules are not configured as desired. The solutions architect wants to confirm which IAM user was responsible for making changes. Which service should the solutions architect use to find the desired information? Here are the options. Option A. Amazon GuardDuty. Option B. Amazon Inspector. Option C. AWS CloudTrail. Option D. AWS Config. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. AWS CloudTrail. AWS CloudTrail records all API calls made in an AWS account, including who made the call, when, what resource was affected, and what changes were made. It is the appropriate service to audit and trace which IAM user made configuration changes to security group rules. CloudTrail logs provide the detailed audit trail needed to identify the specific user responsible for the configuration changes. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Amazon GuardDuty is a threat detection service that identifies malicious activity and security issues, not a service for tracking configuration changes or identifying which user made them. Option B is incorrect. Amazon Inspector is a vulnerability assessment service that scans for vulnerabilities in applications and infrastructure, not for auditing user actions or configuration changes. Option D is incorrect. AWS Config tracks configuration changes to resources but does not identify which IAM user made the changes; CloudTrail is required to see the user responsible. Therefore, C, AWS CloudTrail, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:46:22 Question 56. A company wants to use an event-driven programming model with AWS Lambda. The company wants to reduce startup latency for Lambda functions that run on Java 11. The company does not have strict latency requirements for the applications. The company wants to reduce cold starts and outlier latencies when a function scales up. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Configure Lambda provisioned concurrency. Option B. Increase the timeout of the Lambda functions. Option C. Increase the memory of the Lambda functions. Option D. Configure Lambda SnapStart. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Configure Lambda SnapStart. Lambda SnapStart for Java 11 is the most cost-effective solution to reduce cold starts without strict latency requirements. SnapStart creates a snapshot of the initialized function and restores it, dramatically reducing startup time with minimal additional cost. It specifically addresses cold starts and outlier latencies during scaling without the ongoing cost of provisioned concurrency. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Provisioned concurrency is costly as it maintains warm instances continuously, even when not needed, since the company lacks strict latency requirements. Option B is incorrect. Increasing timeout does not reduce startup latency; it only affects execution duration limits. Option C is incorrect. While increased memory can reduce cold start time slightly, it increases cost per invocation and is less efficient than SnapStart for Java. Therefore, D, Configure Lambda SnapStart, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:48:30 Question 57. A company uses Amazon EC2 instances and Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) to run its self-managed database. The company has 350 TB of data spread across all EBS volumes. The company takes daily EBS snapshots and keeps the snapshots for 1 month. The daily change rate is 5% of the EBS volumes. Because of new regulations, the company needs to keep the monthly snapshots for 7 years. The company needs to change its backup strategy to comply with the new regulations and to ensure that data is available with minimal administrative effort. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Keep the daily snapshot in the EBS snapshot standard tier for 1 month. Copy the monthly snapshot to Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive with a 7-year retention period. Option B. Continue with the current EBS snapshot policy. Add a new policy to move the monthly snapshot to Amazon EBS Snapshots Archive with a 7year retention period. Option C. Keep the daily snapshot in the EBS snapshot standard tier for 1 month. Keep the monthly snapshot in the standard tier for 7 years. Use incremental snapshots. Option D. Keep the daily snapshot in the EBS snapshot standard tier. Use EBS direct APIs to take snapshots of all the EBS volumes every month. Store the snapshots in an Amazon S3 bucket in the Infrequent Access tier for 7 years. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Continue with the current EBS snapshot policy. Add a new policy to move the monthly snapshot to Amazon EBS Snapshots Archive with a 7year retention period. with a 7year retention period. EBS Snapshots Archive tier is specifically designed for long-term retention of snapshots at a significantly lower cost than standard storage while maintaining immediate accessibility. The solution keeps daily snapshots in the standard tier for short-term recovery (1 month) and automatically moves monthly snapshots to the archive tier for the 7-year retention requirement. This approach minimizes administrative effort through automated lifecycle policies and is more cost-effective than copying to S3 Glacier or maintaining all snapshots in standard tier. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. While S3 Glacier Deep Archive is cost-effective, manually copying snapshots requires additional administrative effort and API calls to S3. Option C is incorrect. Keeping monthly snapshots in standard tier for 7 years is significantly more expensive than using the archive tier. Option D is incorrect. Using EBS Direct APIs and S3 Infrequent Access involves manual scripting and more operational overhead than native snapshot lifecycle management. Therefore, B, Continue with the current EBS snapshot policy. Add a new policy to move the monthly snapshot to Amazon EBS Snapshots Archive with a 7year retention period, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:52:03 Question 58. A company’s infrastructure consists of Amazon EC2 instances and an Amazon RDS DB instance in a single AWS Region. The company wants to back up its data in a separate Region. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS Backup to copy EC2 backups and RDS backups to the separate Region. Option B. Use Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager (Amazon DLM) to copy EC2 backups and RDS backups to the separate Region. Option C. Create Amazon Machine Images (AMIs) of the EC2 instances. Copy the AMIs to the separate Region. Create a read replica for the RDS DB instance in the separate Region. Option D. Create Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) snapshots. Copy the EBS snapshots to the separate Region. Create RDS snapshots. Export the RDS snapshots to Amazon S3. Configure S3 Cross-Region Replication (CRR) to the separate Region. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Use AWS Backup to copy EC2 backups and RDS backups to the separate Region. AWS Backup is a centralized, policy-based service that handles backup and restore for both EC2 instances and RDS databases, with built-in support for cross-region copying. It requires minimal operational overhead as it automates the entire backup lifecycle and cross-region replication without requiring manual management of AMIs, snapshots, or S3 exports. This is simpler and more maintainable than the alternatives. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Amazon DLM is designed specifically for EBS snapshot lifecycle management and does not support RDS backups or cross-region copying of RDS resources. Option C is incorrect. This approach requires manual creation of AMIs and manual RDS read replica setup, resulting in significantly higher operational overhead than AWS Backup. Option D is incorrect. This requires manual EBS snapshot creation, manual RDS snapshot export to S3, and S3 CRR configuration, involving multiple steps and higher operational complexity than AWS Backup. Therefore, A, Use AWS Backup to copy EC2 backups and RDS backups to the separate Region, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:54:57 Question 59. A company has developed a non-production application that is composed of multiple microservices for each of the company's business units. A single development team maintains all the microservices. The current architecture uses a static web frontend and a Java-based backend that contains the application logic. The architecture also uses a MySQL database that the company hosts on an Amazon EC2 instance. The company needs to ensure that the application is secure and available globally. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Use Amazon CloudFront and AWS Amplify to host the static web frontend. Refactor the microservices to use AWS Lambda functions that the microservices access by using Amazon API Gateway. Migrate the MySQL database to an Amazon EC2 Reserved Instance. Option B. Use Amazon CloudFront and Amazon S3 to host the static web frontend. Refactor the microservices to use AWS Lambda functions that the microservices access by using Amazon API Gateway. Migrate the MySQL database to Amazon RDS for MySQL. Option C. Use Amazon CloudFront and Amazon S3 to host the static web frontend. Refactor the microservices to use AWS Lambda functions that are in a target group behind a Network Load Balancer. Migrate the MySQL database to Amazon RDS for MySQL. Option D. Use Amazon S3 to host the static web frontend. Refactor the microservices to use AWS Lambda functions that are in a target group behind an Application Load Balancer. Migrate the MySQL database to an Amazon EC2 Reserved Instance. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use Amazon CloudFront and Amazon S3 to host the static web frontend. Refactor the microservices to use AWS Lambda functions that the microservices access by using Amazon API Gateway. Migrate the MySQL database to Amazon RDS for MySQL. Option B provides the least operational overhead by combining CloudFront with S3 for static content hosting (no server management), Lambda with API Gateway for microservices (fully managed, auto-scaling), and RDS for MySQL (managed relational database with automated backups and failover). This eliminates the need to manage EC2 instances while providing global availability through CloudFront. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. AWS Amplify adds unnecessary complexity for a non-production application, and EC2 Reserved Instances require ongoing management and do not provide auto-scaling. Option C is incorrect. Using NLB with Lambda in target groups adds unnecessary complexity; API Gateway is the standard, simpler approach for Lambda-based microservices. Option D is incorrect. Using only S3 without CloudFront limits global performance, and ALB with Lambda requires more configuration than API Gateway; EC2 instances require manual management. Therefore, B, Use Amazon CloudFront and Amazon S3 to host the static web frontend. Refactor the microservices to use AWS Lambda functions that the microservices access by using Amazon API Gateway. Migrate the MySQL database to Amazon RDS for MySQL, is the correct answer.
Play from 2:58:53 Question 60. A company's application uses Network Load Balancers, Auto Scaling groups, Amazon EC2 instances, and databases that are deployed in an Amazon VPC. The company wants to capture information about traffic to and from the network interfaces in near real time in its Amazon VPC. The company wants to send the information to Amazon OpenSearch Service for analysis. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create a log group in Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Configure VPC Flow Logs to send the log data to the log group. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Streams to stream the logs from the log group to OpenSearch Service. Option B. Create a log group in Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Configure VPC Flow Logs to send the log data to the log group. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose to stream the logs from the log group to OpenSearch Service. Option C. Create a trail in AWS CloudTrail. Configure VPC Flow Logs to send the log data to the trail. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Streams to stream the logs from the trail to OpenSearch Service. Option D. Create a trail in AWS CloudTrail. Configure VPC Flow Logs to send the log data to the trail. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose to stream the logs from the trail to OpenSearch Service. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Create a log group in Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Configure VPC Flow Logs to send the log data to the log group. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose to stream the logs from the log group to OpenSearch Service. VPC Flow Logs sends network traffic information to CloudWatch Logs. Kinesis Data Firehose is the ideal service for reliably streaming log data from CloudWatch Logs to OpenSearch Service with built-in transformation and buffering capabilities. This provides near real-time analysis while being the most straightforward integration path. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Kinesis Data Streams requires additional code to consume and forward logs to OpenSearch, adding complexity versus Firehose. Option C is incorrect. CloudTrail logs API activity, not network traffic; VPC Flow Logs do not send data to CloudTrail trails. Option D is incorrect. CloudTrail is incorrect for VPC Flow Logs; VPC Flow Logs use CloudWatch Logs as their destination, not CloudTrail. Therefore, B, Create a log group in Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Configure VPC Flow Logs to send the log data to the log group. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose to stream the logs from the log group to OpenSearch Service, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:02:02 Question 61. A company uses Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP in its primary AWS Region for CIFS and NFS file shares. Applications that run on Amazon EC2 instances access the file shares. The company needs a storage disaster recovery (DR) solution in a secondary Region. The data that is replicated in the secondary Region needs to be accessed by using the same protocols as the primary Region. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Create an AWS Lambda function to copy the data to an Amazon S3 bucket. Replicate the S3 bucket to the secondary Region. Option B. Create a backup of the FSx for ONTAP volumes by using AWS Backup. Copy the volumes to the secondary Region. Create a new FSx for ONTAP instance from the backup. Option C. Create an FSx for ONTAP instance in the secondary Region. Use NetApp SnapMirror to replicate data from the primary Region to the secondary Region. Option D. Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) volume. Migrate the current data to the volume. Replicate the volume to the secondary Region. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create an FSx for ONTAP instance in the secondary Region. Use NetApp SnapMirror to replicate data from the primary Region to the secondary Region. Using NetApp SnapMirror to replicate data from the primary FSx for ONTAP instance to a secondary region requires the least operational overhead. SnapMirror is a native NetApp replication technology that maintains the same file system structure and protocols (CIFS and NFS), requires minimal configuration, and automatically handles replication. This avoids manual copying, backup/restore procedures, and data migration efforts, while ensuring the secondary region can serve traffic using identical protocols and configurations. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Lambda-based copying to S3 and replication creates significant operational overhead and requires rebuilding file shares from S3 in the secondary region. Option B is incorrect. AWS Backup with manual volume restoration is more operationally intensive than native SnapMirror replication and introduces delays. Option D is incorrect. Migrating to Amazon EFS requires data transformation, protocol changes (EFS is NFS-only, not CIFS), and eliminates NetApp-specific features already in use. Therefore, C, Create an FSx for ONTAP instance in the secondary Region. Use NetApp SnapMirror to replicate data from the primary Region to the secondary Region, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:05:18 Question 62. A company wants to create a mobile app that allows users to stream slow-motion video clips on their mobile devices. Currently, the app captures video clips and uploads the video clips in raw format into an Amazon S3 bucket. The app retrieves these video clips directly from the S3 bucket. However, the videos are large in their raw format. Users are experiencing issues with buffering and playback on mobile devices. The company wants to implement solutions to maximize the performance and scalability of the app while minimizing operational overhead. Which combination of solutions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Deploy Amazon CloudFront for content delivery and caching. Option B. Use AWS DataSync to replicate the video files across AW'S Regions in other S3 buckets. Option C. Use Amazon Elastic Transcoder to convert the video files to more appropriate formats. Option D. Deploy an Auto Sealing group of Amazon EC2 instances in Local Zones for content delivery and caching. Option E. Deploy an Auto Scaling group of Amazon EC2 instances to convert the video files to more appropriate formats. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are A. Deploy Amazon CloudFront for content delivery and caching, and C. Use Amazon Elastic Transcoder to convert the video files to more appropriate formats. A. Deploy Amazon CloudFront for content delivery and caching. C. Use Amazon Elastic Transcoder to convert the video files to more appropriate formats. CloudFront (A) is essential for content delivery and caching to reduce buffering and improve playback performance on mobile devices by distributing content geographically and caching at edge locations. Amazon Elastic Transcoder (C) converts large raw video files into mobile-optimized formats, reducing file sizes and enabling smooth playback on mobile devices. Together, these solutions maximize performance and scalability while minimizing operational overhead. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. DataSync is for data replication between storage systems, not for optimizing video delivery or format conversion for mobile playback. Option D is incorrect. EC2 instances in Local Zones are unnecessary and create operational overhead; CloudFront is the managed solution for content delivery. Option E is incorrect. Using EC2 instances for transcoding creates significant operational overhead; Elastic Transcoder is the managed service designed specifically for this purpose. Therefore, A and C are the correct answers.
Play from 3:08:26 Question 63. A global company runs its applications in multiple AWS accounts in AWS Organizations. The company's applications use multipart uploads to upload data to multiple Amazon S3 buckets across AWS Regions. The company wants to report on incomplete multipart uploads for cost compliance purposes. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Configure AWS Config with a rule to report the incomplete multipart upload object count. Option B. Create a service control policy (SCP) to report the incomplete multipart upload object count. Option C. Configure S3 Storage Lens to report the incomplete multipart upload object count. Option D. Create an S3 Multi-Region Access Point to report the incomplete multipart upload object count. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Configure S3 Storage Lens to report the incomplete multipart upload object count. S3 Storage Lens provides comprehensive visibility into incomplete multipart uploads across all S3 buckets in multiple AWS accounts and regions. It automatically collects and reports metrics with minimal configuration, requiring no custom rules or policies. Storage Lens is purpose-built for organization-wide S3 analytics and compliance reporting with the least operational overhead. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. AWS Config requires custom rule creation and ongoing management for tracking incomplete multipart uploads; it's not optimized for S3-specific metrics. Option B is incorrect. Service Control Policies govern permissions and compliance enforcement, not data collection or reporting on incomplete multipart uploads. Option D is incorrect. Multi-Region Access Points manage access patterns across regions, not cost compliance reporting on incomplete multipart uploads. Therefore, C, Configure S3 Storage Lens to report the incomplete multipart upload object count, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:11:02 Question 64. A company has stored millions of objects across multiple prefixes in an Amazon S3 bucket by using the Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive storage class. The company needs to delete all data older than 3 years except for a subset of data that must be retained. The company has identified the data that must be retained and wants to implement a serverless solution. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use S3 Inventory to list all objects. Use the AWS CLI to create a script that runs on an Amazon EC2 instance that deletes objects from the inventory list. Option B. Use AWS Batch to delete objects older than 3 years except for the data that must be retained. Option C. Provision an AWS Glue crawler to query objects older than 3 years. Save the manifest file of old objects. Create a script to delete objects in the manifest. Option D. Enable S3 Inventory. Create an AWS Lambda function to filter and delete objects. Invoke the Lambda function with S3 Batch Operations to delete objects by using the inventory reports. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Enable S3 Inventory. Create an AWS Lambda function to filter and delete objects. Invoke the Lambda function with S3 Batch Operations to delete objects by using the inventory reports. S3 Inventory provides a manifest of all objects across the bucket, an AWS Lambda function filters objects by age and retention status, and S3 Batch Operations executes deletions at scale using the Lambda function as the action. This is fully serverless, requires no EC2 or Batch infrastructure, and efficiently handles millions of objects across multiple prefixes in Glacier Deep Archive. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Using EC2 to run deletion scripts is not serverless and requires manual scaling and maintenance; it's not a scalable solution for millions of objects. Option B is incorrect. AWS Batch requires provisioning compute resources; while it can process large jobs, Lambda with S3 Batch Operations is more serverless and cost-effective for this use case. Option C is incorrect. AWS Glue crawler is designed for metadata discovery and cataloging, not for filtering and deleting objects; this approach adds unnecessary complexity compared to Lambda + S3 Batch Operations. Therefore, D, Enable S3 Inventory. Create an AWS Lambda function to filter and delete objects. Invoke the Lambda function with S3 Batch Operations to delete objects by using the inventory reports, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:14:19 Question 65. A company is running a business-critical web application on Amazon EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer. The EC2 instances are in an Auto Scaling group. The application uses an Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL database that is deployed in a single Availability Zone. The company wants the application to be highly available with minimum downtime and minimum loss of data. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational effort? Here are the options. Option A. Place the EC2 instances in different AWS Regions. Use Amazon Route 53 health checks to redirect traffic. Use Aurora PostgreSQL CrossRegion Replication. Option B. Configure the Auto Scaling group to use multiple Availability Zones. Configure the database as Multi-AZ. Configure an Amazon RDS Proxy instance for the database. Option C. Configure the Auto Scaling group to use one Availability Zone. Generate hourly snapshots of the database. Recover the database from the snapshots in the event of a failure. Option D. Configure the Auto Scaling group to use multiple AWS Regions. Write the data from the application to Amazon S3. Use S3 Event Notifications to launch an AWS Lambda function to write the data to the database. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Configure the Auto Scaling group to use multiple Availability Zones. Configure the database as Multi-AZ. Configure an Amazon RDS Proxy instance for the database. Configuring the Auto Scaling group across multiple Availability Zones ensures EC2 instance redundancy, while Multi-AZ Aurora PostgreSQL provides automatic database failover with minimal data loss. Adding RDS Proxy improves connection efficiency and resilience. This solution achieves high availability with minimal downtime and data loss while requiring the least operational effort compared to managing cross-region replication, manual snapshots, or complex S3-based architectures. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Cross-region deployment adds significant complexity, cost, and operational overhead while introducing higher latency and data consistency challenges. Option C is incorrect. Hourly snapshots result in 1 hour of potential data loss (unacceptable RPO) and require manual recovery processes, increasing operational effort. Option D is incorrect. Multi-region deployment with S3 as an intermediary is overly complex, introduces multiple points of failure, and does not align with relational database best practices. Therefore, B, Configure the Auto Scaling group to use multiple Availability Zones. Configure the database as Multi-AZ. Configure an Amazon RDS Proxy instance for the database, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:17:35 Question 66. A company wants to implement a backup strategy for Amazon EC2 data and multiple Amazon S3 buckets. Because of regulatory requirements, the company must retain backup files for a specific time period. The company must not alter the files for the duration of the retention period. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS Backup to create a backup vault that has a vault lock in governance mode. Create the required backup plan. Option B. Use Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager to create the required automated snapshot policy. Option C. Use Amazon S3 File Gateway to create the backup. Configure the appropriate S3 Lifecycle management. Option D. Use AWS Backup to create a backup vault that has a vault lock in compliance mode. Create the required backup plan. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Use AWS Backup to create a backup vault that has a vault lock in compliance mode. Create the required backup plan. AWS Backup with vault lock in compliance mode is the correct solution for regulatory requirements to retain and protect backup files. Compliance mode ensures that backup files cannot be deleted or altered during the retention period, even by authorized users or AWS administrators. This meets the immutability requirement mandated by regulatory compliance. The backup plan can then be configured to handle both EC2 data and S3 buckets. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Governance mode allows authorized users to modify or delete retention settings, which does not provide the required immutability for regulatory compliance. Option B is incorrect. Data Lifecycle Manager creates snapshots but does not provide vault locking or immutability guarantees required by regulations. Option C is incorrect. S3 File Gateway with lifecycle management does not provide the same level of backup protection and compliance assurance as AWS Backup with vault lock. Therefore, D, Use AWS Backup to create a backup vault that has a vault lock in compliance mode. Create the required backup plan, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:20:16 Question 67. A company is implementing new data retention policies for all databases that run on Amazon RDS DB instances. The company must retain daily backups for a minimum period of 2 years. The backups must be consistent and restorable. Which solution should a solutions architect recommend to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create a backup vault in AWS Backup to retain RDS backups. Create a new backup plan with a daily schedule and an expiration period of 2 years after creation. Assign the RDS DB instances to the backup plan. Option B. Configure a backup window for the RDS DB instances for daily snapshots. Assign a snapshot retention policy of 2 years to each RDS DB instance. Use Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager (Amazon DLM) to schedule snapshot deletions. Option C. Configure database transaction logs to be automatically backed up to Amazon CloudWatch Logs with an expiration period of 2 years. Option D. Configure an AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) replication task. Deploy a replication instance, and configure a change data capture (CDC) task to stream database changes to Amazon S3 as the target. Configure S3 Lifecycle policies to delete the snapshots after 2 years. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Create a backup vault in AWS Backup to retain RDS backups. Create a new backup plan with a daily schedule and an expiration period of 2 years after creation. Assign the RDS DB instances to the backup plan. AWS Backup is the purpose-built service for managing backups across AWS services including RDS. It provides centralized backup management, enforces retention policies, ensures consistency, and supports recovery. A backup vault with a daily schedule and 2- year expiration directly addresses the requirements. This is more robust than manual snapshot management and provides better compliance tracking. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Manual snapshot retention policies on RDS instances are not scalable across multiple instances and lack centralized management; DLM is designed for volume snapshots, not RDS snapshots. Option C is incorrect. CloudWatch Logs is for log storage, not database backups, and does not provide restorable database snapshots. Option D is incorrect. DMS with CDC to S3 captures change data but does not create consistent, restorable database backups suitable for retention policies. Therefore, A, Create a backup vault in AWS Backup to retain RDS backups. Create a new backup plan with a daily schedule and an expiration period of 2 years after creation. Assign the RDS DB instances to the backup plan, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:23:39 Question 68. A company runs container applications by using Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS). The company's workload is not consistent throughout the day. The company wants Amazon EKS to scale in and out according to the workload. Which combination of steps will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Use an AWS Lambda function to resize the EKS cluster. Option B. Use the Kubernetes Metrics Server to activate horizontal pod autoscaling. Option C. Use the Kubernetes Cluster Autoscaler to manage the number of nodes in the cluster. Option D. Use Amazon API Gateway and connect it to Amazon EKS. Option E. Use AWS App Mesh to observe network activity. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are B. Use the Kubernetes Metrics Server to activate horizontal pod autoscaling, and C. Use the Kubernetes Cluster Autoscaler to manage the number of nodes in the cluster. Horizontal Pod Autoscaler (HPA) with Kubernetes Metrics Server scales pods based on metrics like CPU and memory, while Cluster Autoscaler manages the underlying EC2 nodes to ensure pods have adequate resources. Together, these two components provide automatic scaling of both application workloads and cluster capacity with minimal operational overhead. This is the standard Kubernetes approach requiring no custom Lambda functions or additional AWS services. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Using Lambda to manually resize clusters adds operational overhead and is not the standard approach for Kubernetes autoscaling. Option D is incorrect. API Gateway is for exposing APIs and has no role in cluster scaling. Option E is incorrect. App Mesh is for observing network traffic but does not perform any scaling functions. Therefore, B and C are the correct answers.
Play from 3:25:57 Question 69. A company uses AWS to host its public ecommerce website. The website uses an AWS Global Accelerator accelerator for traffic from the internet. The Global Accelerator accelerator forwards the traffic to an Application Load Balancer (ALB) that is the entry point for an Auto Scaling group. The company recently identified a DDoS attack on the website. The company needs a solution to mitigate future attacks. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST implementation effort? Here are the options. Option A. Configure an AWS WAF web ACL for the Global Accelerator accelerator to block traffic by using rate-based rules. Option B. Configure an AWS Lambda function to read the ALB metrics to block attacks by updating a VPC network ACL. Option C. Configure an AWS WAF web ACL on the ALB to block traffic by using rate-based rules. Option D. Configure an Amazon CloudFront distribution in front of the Global Accelerator accelerator. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Configure an AWS WAF web ACL for the Global Accelerator accelerator to block traffic by using rate-based rules. AWS WAF can be attached directly to Global Accelerator to provide DDoS protection with rate-based rules at the edge. This requires minimal implementation effort compared to other options. While WAF on ALB (option C) could work, attaching it to Global Accelerator is more efficient as it filters malicious traffic earlier in the pipeline, protecting the entire downstream infrastructure. Global Accelerator integrates seamlessly with WAF without additional architectural changes. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Lambda functions reading ALB metrics and updating network ACLs is overly complex, requires custom development, and lacks the native DDoS protection capabilities of WAF. Option C is incorrect. While WAF on ALB works, it allows malicious traffic to reach the ALB first, wasting capacity. WAF on Global Accelerator filters traffic at the edge, which is more efficient. Option D is incorrect. Adding CloudFront in front of Global Accelerator adds unnecessary complexity and latency; Global Accelerator already provides edge routing and DDoS protection via WAF. Therefore, A, Configure an AWS WAF web ACL for the Global Accelerator accelerator to block traffic by using rate-based rules, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:29:01 Question 70. A company’s application is receiving data from multiple data sources. The size of the data varies and is expected to increase over time. The current maximum size is 700 KB. The data volume and data size continue to grow as more data sources are added. The company decides to use Amazon DynamoDB as the primary database for the application. A solutions architect needs to identify a solution that handles the large data sizes. Which solution will meet these requirements in the MOST operationally efficient way? Here are the options. Option A. Create an AWS Lambda function to filter the data that exceeds DynamoDB item size limits. Store the larger data in an Amazon DocumentDB (with MongoDB compatibility) database. Option B. Store the large data as objects in an Amazon S3 bucket. In a DynamoDB table, create an item that has an attribute that points to the S3 URL of the data. Option C. Split all incoming large data into a collection of items that have the same partition key. Write the data to a DynamoDB table in a single operation by using the BatchWriteItem API operation. Option D. Create an AWS Lambda function that uses gzip compression to compress the large objects as they are written to a DynamoDB table. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Store the large data as objects in an Amazon S3 bucket. In a DynamoDB table, create an item that has an attribute that points to the S3 URL of the data. DynamoDB has a 400 KB item size limit (item size includes attribute names and values). For data approaching 700 KB that will grow further, storing large objects in S3 and referencing them via URLs in DynamoDB items is the standard, operationally efficient pattern. This approach requires minimal refactoring and scales seamlessly as data sizes increase. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Using Lambda to filter data and routing to DocumentDB adds operational complexity and defeats the purpose of using DynamoDB as the primary database. Option C is incorrect. BatchWriteItem does not increase item size limits; this approach would fail when items exceed the 400 KB limit regardless of batch operations. Option D is incorrect. Compression can reduce size somewhat, but 700 KB compressed may still exceed limits, and this approach adds unnecessary complexity compared to the S3 reference pattern. Therefore, B, Store the large data as objects in an Amazon S3 bucket. In a DynamoDB table, create an item that has an attribute that points to the S3 URL of the data, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:32:16 Question 71. An ecommerce company is running a seasonal online sale. The company hosts its website on Amazon EC2 instances spanning multiple Availability Zones. The company wants its website to manage sudden traffic increases during the sale. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Auto Scaling group that is large enough to handle peak traffic load. Stop half of the Amazon EC2 instances. Configure the Auto Scaling group to use the stopped instances to scale out when traffic increases. Option B. Create an Auto Scaling group for the website. Set the minimum size of the Auto Scaling group so that it can handle high traffic volumes without the need to scale out. Option C. Use Amazon CloudFront and Amazon ElastiCache to cache dynamic content with an Auto Scaling group set as the origin. Configure the Auto Scaling group with the instances necessary to populate CloudFront and ElastiCache. Scale in after the cache is fully populated. Option D. Configure an Auto Scaling group to scale out as traffic increases. Create a launch template to start new instances from a preconfigured Amazon Machine Image (AMI). Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Configure an Auto Scaling group to scale out as traffic increases. Create a launch template to start new instances from a preconfigured Amazon Machine Image (AMI). Configuring an Auto Scaling group to dynamically scale out as traffic increases during the seasonal sale, combined with a preconfigured AMI launch template, provides cost- effective capacity that grows on-demand only when needed. This approach avoids paying for unused capacity during non-peak times while ensuring the ability to handle traffic surges efficiently. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Stopping instances and restarting them is inefficient and unreliable; scaling relies on launching new instances rather than merely starting stopped ones. Option B is incorrect. Setting minimum size large enough for peak traffic means paying for maximum capacity even during off-peak periods, wasting money most of the time. Option C is incorrect. Caching with CloudFront and ElastiCache adds complexity and cost; it does not address the core scaling problem and requires pre-scaling to populate caches. Therefore, D, Configure an Auto Scaling group to scale out as traffic increases. Create a launch template to start new instances from a preconfigured Amazon Machine Image (AMI), is the correct answer.
Play from 3:35:22 Question 72. A company is designing a new multi-tier web application that consists of the following components: • Web and application servers that run on Amazon EC2 instances as part of Auto Scaling groups • An Amazon RDS DB instance for data storage A solutions architect needs to limit access to the application servers so that only the web servers can access them. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Deploy AWS PrivateLink in front of the application servers. Configure the network ACL to allow only the web servers to access the application servers. Option B. Deploy a VPC endpoint in front of the application servers. Configure the security group to allow only the web servers to access the application servers. Option C. Deploy a Network Load Balancer with a target group that contains the application servers' Auto Scaling group. Configure the network ACL to allow only the web servers to access the application servers. Option D. Deploy an Application Load Balancer with a target group that contains the application servers' Auto Scaling group. Configure the security group to allow only the web servers to access the application servers. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Deploy an Application Load Balancer with a target group that contains the application servers' Auto Scaling group. Configure the security group to allow only the web servers to access the application servers. An Application Load Balancer placed in front of the application servers allows the security group associated with the ALB's target group to accept traffic only from the web servers' security group. This creates a logical access boundary where web servers can access application servers through the ALB, while the security group rules enforce this restriction at the instance level. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. PrivateLink is for exposing services to external customers, not for internal multi-tier architecture access control. Option B is incorrect. VPC endpoints are for private access to AWS services, not for controlling traffic between EC2 tiers. Option C is incorrect. Network ACLs are less granular and harder to manage dynamically; security groups are the proper mechanism for instance-level access control in this scenario. Therefore, D, Deploy an Application Load Balancer with a target group that contains the application servers' Auto Scaling group. Configure the security group to allow only the web servers to access the application servers, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:38:22 Question 73. A company wants to use the AWS Cloud to improve its on-premises disaster recovery (DR) configuration. The company's core production business application uses Microsoft SQL Server Standard, which runs on a virtual machine (VM). The application has a recovery point objective (RPO) of 30 seconds or fewer and a recovery time objective (RTO) of 60 minutes. The DR solution needs to minimize costs wherever possible. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Configure a multi-site active/active setup between the on-premises server and AWS by using Microsoft SQL Server Enterprise with Always On availability groups. Option B. Configure a warm standby Amazon RDS for SQL Server database on AWS. Configure AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to use change data capture (CDC). Option C. Use AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery configured to replicate disk changes to AWS as a pilot light. Option D. Use third-party backup software to capture backups every night. Store a secondary set of backups in Amazon S3. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Use AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery configured to replicate disk changes to AWS as a pilot light. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery meets the RPO of 30 seconds and RTO of 60 minutes requirements. Configured as a pilot light, it continuously replicates disk changes to AWS at near-real-time intervals, providing recovery capability without running expensive infrastructure continuously. This is more cost-effective than warm standby and faster than backup-based approaches while using Standard edition licensing. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Enterprise edition with Always On availability groups is significantly more expensive than required; active/active multi-site setup exceeds cost minimization goals. Option B is incorrect. Warm standby maintains a running RDS instance, increasing costs; CDC-based DMS may not achieve 30-second RPO consistently. Option D is incorrect. Nightly backups cannot meet 30-second RPO requirement; recovery would be measured in hours, not minutes, failing the RTO objective. Therefore, C, Use AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery configured to replicate disk changes to AWS as a pilot light, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:41:19 Question 74. A company uses AWS Cost Explorer to monitor its AWS costs. The company notices that Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) storage and snapshot costs increase every month. However, the company does not purchase additional EBS storage every month. The company wants to optimize monthly costs for its current storage usage. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Use logs in Amazon CloudWatch Logs to monitor the storage utilization of Amazon EBS. Use Amazon EBS Elastic Volumes to reduce the size of the EBS volumes. Option B. Use a custom script to monitor space usage. Use Amazon EBS Elastic Volumes to reduce the size of the EBS volumes. Option C. Delete all expired and unused snapshots to reduce snapshot costs. Option D. Delete all nonessential snapshots. Use Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager to create and manage the snapshots according to the company's snapshot policy requirements. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Delete all nonessential snapshots. Use Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager to create and manage the snapshots according to the company's snapshot policy requirements. The cost increase is primarily due to accumulating snapshots rather than increased EBS volume storage (the company states it does not purchase additional storage). Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager automates snapshot creation and deletion according to retention policies, preventing the accumulation of expired snapshots without manual intervention. This reduces snapshot costs with minimal operational overhead compared to manually deleting snapshots or monitoring storage utilization. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. CloudWatch Logs monitoring and manual Elastic Volumes resizing address storage volume size, not the snapshot accumulation that is the root cause. Option B is incorrect. Custom scripts for monitoring add operational overhead and do not address the root cause of accumulating snapshots. Option C is incorrect. Manually deleting snapshots is labor-intensive and provides no ongoing automation; Data Lifecycle Manager automates this process. Therefore, D, Delete all nonessential snapshots. Use Amazon Data Lifecycle Manager to create and manage the snapshots according to the company's snapshot policy requirements, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:44:22 Question 75. A company runs a microservice-based serverless web application. The application must be able to retrieve data from multiple Amazon DynamoDB tables A solutions architect needs to give the application the ability to retrieve the data with no impact on the baseline performance of the application. Which solution will meet these requirements in the MOST operationally efficient way? Here are the options. Option A. AWS AppSync pipeline resolvers. Option B. Amazon CloudFront with Lambda@Edge functions. Option C. Edge-optimized Amazon API Gateway with AWS Lambda functions. Option D. Amazon Athena Federated Query with a DynamoDB connector. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. AWS AppSync pipeline resolvers. AWS AppSync pipeline resolvers provide the most operationally efficient solution for a serverless application that needs to retrieve data from multiple DynamoDB tables without impacting baseline performance. AppSync is designed specifically for GraphQL APIs that can efficiently query multiple data sources, and pipeline resolvers allow complex data retrieval logic while remaining serverless with minimal operational overhead. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. CloudFront with Lambda@Edge adds complexity and is better suited for caching static content rather than dynamic database queries. Option C is incorrect. Edge-optimized API Gateway with Lambda functions requires more operational management and is less efficient than AppSync's native multi-table query capabilities. Option D is incorrect. Athena Federated Query is analytical, not operational, and adds latency unsuitable for a web application's baseline performance requirements. Therefore, A, AWS AppSync pipeline resolvers, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:46:39 Question 76. A company uses high concurrency AWS Lambda functions to process a constantly increasing number of messages in a message queue during marketing events. The Lambda functions use CPU intensive code to process the messages. The company wants to reduce the compute costs and to maintain service latency for its customers. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Configure reserved concurrency for the Lambda functions. Decrease the memory allocated to the Lambda functions. Option B. Configure reserved concurrency for the Lambda functions. Increase the memory according to AWS Compute Optimizer recommendations. Option C. Configure provisioned concurrency for the Lambda functions. Decrease the memory allocated to the Lambda functions. Option D. Configure provisioned concurrency for the Lambda functions. Increase the memory according to AWS Compute Optimizer recommendations. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Configure reserved concurrency for the Lambda functions. Increase the memory according to AWS Compute Optimizer recommendations. For CPU-intensive workloads with high concurrency, reserved concurrency ensures consistent performance under load, while increasing memory also increases CPU allocation proportionally (Lambda pricing ties CPU to memory), reducing execution time and overall costs. Decreasing memory would worsen CPU-intensive performance. Provisioned concurrency adds warm-start cost without addressing the fundamental CPU efficiency issue. AWS Compute Optimizer recommends memory increases for CPU-bound workloads. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Decreasing memory for CPU-intensive workloads reduces CPU allocation, increasing execution time and latency. Option C is incorrect. Provisioned concurrency adds unnecessary costs without improving CPU efficiency for batch processing. Option D is incorrect. While Fargate recommendation is correct, provisioned concurrency adds cost overhead inappropriate for batch message processing. Therefore, B, Configure reserved concurrency for the Lambda functions. Increase the memory according to AWS Compute Optimizer recommendations, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:49:23 Question 77. A company is moving its data management application to AWS. The company wants to transition to an event-driven architecture. The architecture needs to be more distributed and to use serverless concepts while performing the different aspects of the workflow. The company also wants to minimize operational overhead. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Build out the workflow in AWS Glue. Use AWS Glue to invoke AWS Lambda functions to process the workflow steps. Option B. Build out the workflow in AWS Step Functions. Deploy the application on Amazon EC2 instances. Use Step Functions to invoke the workflow steps on the EC2 instances. Option C. Build out the workflow in Amazon EventBridge. Use EventBridge to invoke AWS Lambda functions on a schedule to process the workflow steps. Option D. Build out the workflow in AWS Step Functions. Use Step Functions to create a state machine. Use the state machine to invoke AWS Lambda functions to process the workflow steps. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Build out the workflow in AWS Step Functions. Use Step Functions to create a state machine. Use the state machine to invoke AWS Lambda functions to process the workflow steps. AWS Step Functions provides serverless orchestration with state machines that coordinate complex workflows across distributed components, including Lambda functions. This meets all requirements: event-driven architecture, distributed processing, serverless concepts, and minimal operational overhead. Step Functions manages the workflow logic without requiring infrastructure management. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. AWS Glue is an ETL service designed for data integration tasks, not general workflow orchestration for event-driven architectures. Option B is incorrect. Deploying on EC2 instances introduces operational overhead and contradicts the serverless requirement. Option C is incorrect. EventBridge with scheduled Lambda invocations is not suitable for complex workflows requiring state management and conditional logic between steps. Therefore, D, Build out the workflow in AWS Step Functions. Use Step Functions to create a state machine. Use the state machine to invoke AWS Lambda functions to process the workflow steps, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:52:16 Question 78. A company is migrating a data center from its on-premises location to AWS. The company has several legacy applications that are hosted on individual virtual servers. Changes to the application designs cannot be made. Each individual virtual server currently runs as its own EC2 instance. A solutions architect needs to ensure that the applications are reliable and fault tolerant after migration to AWS. The applications will run on Amazon EC2 instances. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Auto Scaling group that has a minimum of one and a maximum of one. Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of each application instance. Use the AMI to create EC2 instances in the Auto Scaling group Configure an Application Load Balancer in front of the Auto Scaling group. Option B. Use AWS Backup to create an hourly backup of the EC2 instance that hosts each application. Store the backup in Amazon S3 in a separate Availability Zone. Configure a disaster recovery process to restore the EC2 instance for each application from its most recent backup. Option C. Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of each application instance. Launch two new EC2 instances from the AMI. Place each EC2 instance in a separate Availability Zone. Configure a Network Load Balancer that has the EC2 instances as targets. Option D. Use AWS Mitigation Hub Refactor Spaces to migrate each application off the EC2 instance. Break down functionality from each application into individual components. Host each application on Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an AWS Fargate launch type. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of each application instance. Launch two new EC2 instances from the AMI. Place each EC2 instance in a separate Availability Zone. Configure a Network Load Balancer that has the EC2 instances as targets. This solution provides reliability and fault tolerance without changing application designs. Creating an AMI preserves each application as-is, launching two instances in separate Availability Zones ensures fault tolerance across infrastructure failures, and a Network Load Balancer provides load distribution and failover. Option A with min/max of 1 provides no redundancy or fault tolerance. Option B's hourly backups don't prevent downtime during failures. Option D requires significant application refactoring into microservices, violating the constraint that application design cannot change. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. A minimum and maximum of 1 instance provides no redundancy, fault tolerance, or high availability. Option B is incorrect. Hourly backups don't prevent outages; recovery takes time and is not fault-tolerant across AZs. Option D is incorrect. Containerizing and breaking down applications into components requires significant design changes, which the requirements explicitly prohibit. Therefore, C, Create an Amazon Machine Image (AMI) of each application instance. Launch two new EC2 instances from the AMI. Place each EC2 instance in a separate Availability Zone. Configure a Network Load Balancer that has the EC2 instances as targets, is the correct answer.
Play from 3:56:12 Question 79. A company is hosting a high-traffic static website on Amazon S3 with an Amazon CloudFront distribution that has a default TTL of 0 seconds. The company wants to implement caching to improve performance for the website. However, the company also wants to ensure that stale content is not served for more than a few minutes after a deployment. Which combination of caching methods should a solutions architect implement to meet these requirements? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Set the CloudFront default TTL to 2 minutes. Option B. Set a default TTL of 2 minutes on the S3 bucket. Option C. Add a Cache-Control private directive to the objects in Amazon S3. Option D. Create an AWS Lambda@Edge function to add an Expires header to HTTP responses. Configure the function to run on viewer response. Option E. Add a Cache-Control max-age directive of 24 hours to the objects in Amazon S3. On deployment, create a CloudFront invalidation to clear any changed files from edge caches. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are A. Set the CloudFront default TTL to 2 minutes, and E. Add a Cache-Control max-age directive of 24 hours to the objects in Amazon S3. On deployment, create a CloudFront invalidation to clear any changed files from edge caches. To balance performance with fresh content, set CloudFront's default TTL to 2 minutes (option A) so content caches briefly at edge locations while remaining relatively fresh. Additionally, implement CloudFront invalidation on deployment (option E) to immediately clear changed files from edge caches, preventing stale content from being served. This combination achieves caching benefits while ensuring minimal staleness after deployments. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. S3 bucket TTL settings don't control CloudFront edge caching behavior; only CloudFront TTL and Cache-Control headers from S3 matter. Option C is incorrect. The private directive prevents caching at all, contradicting the goal of implementing caching for performance. Option D is incorrect. Lambda@Edge adds complexity and operational overhead without providing the straightforward solution that CloudFront TTL and invalidation offer. Therefore, A and E are the correct answers.
Play from 3:58:59 Question 80. A company is using AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) keys to encrypt AWS Lambda environment variables. A solutions architect needs to ensure that the required permissions are in place to decrypt and use the environment variables. Which steps must the solutions architect take to implement the correct permissions? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Add AWS KMS permissions in the Lambda resource policy. Option B. Add AWS KMS permissions in the Lambda execution role. Option C. Add AWS KMS permissions in the Lambda function policy. Option D. Allow the Lambda execution role in the AWS KMS key policy. Option E. Allow the Lambda resource policy in the AWS KMS key policy. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are B. Add AWS KMS permissions in the Lambda execution role, and D. Allow the Lambda execution role in the AWS KMS key policy. Lambda needs kms:Decrypt permissions in its execution role (B) to decrypt environment variables at runtime, and the KMS key policy must allow the Lambda execution role (D) to perform decryption. Option A places permissions in the wrong resource type, option C conflates function policy with execution role, and option E tries to add the resource policy to the key policy which is incorrect. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Lambda resource policies control API access to the Lambda function, not KMS permissions needed for decryption. Option C is incorrect. Lambda function policy is different from the execution role; KMS permissions must be in the execution role. Option E is incorrect. Resource policies cannot be added to KMS key policies; the execution role identity must be allowed in the key policy instead. Therefore, B and D are the correct answers.
Play from 4:01:19 Question 81. A company wants to migrate its on-premises data center to AWS. According to the company's compliance requirements, the company can use only the ap-northeast-3 Region. Company administrators are not permitted to connect VPCs to the internet. Which solutions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS Control Tower to implement data residency guardrails to deny internet access and deny access to all AWS Regions except apnortheast-3. Option B. Use rules in AWS WAF to prevent internet access. Deny access to all AWS Regions except ap-northeast-3 in the AWS account settings. Option C. Use AWS Organizations to configure service control policies (SCPS) that prevent VPCs from gaining internet access. Deny access to all AWS Regions except ap-northeast-3. Option D. Create an outbound rule for the network ACL in each VPC to deny all traffic from 0.0.0.0/0. Create an IAM policy for each user to prevent the use of any AWS Region other than ap-northeast-3. Option E. Use AWS Config to activate managed rules to detect and alert for internet gateways and to detect and alert for new resources deployed outside of ap-northeast-3. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are A. Use AWS Control Tower to implement data residency guardrails to deny internet access and deny access to all AWS Regions except apnortheast-3, and C. Use AWS Organizations to configure service control policies (SCPS) that prevent VPCs from gaining internet access. Deny access to all AWS Regions except ap-northeast-3. AWS Control Tower (Option A) provides guardrails that can enforce data residency and deny internet access at scale. AWS Organizations SCPs (Option C) can restrict service usage to specific regions and deny internet-related actions like creating IGWs. Together, these solutions provide organization-wide policy enforcement that meets both the regional and internet access compliance requirements without relying on individual resource configurations. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. AWS WAF is a web application firewall for Layer 7 protection, not for regional or internet access restrictions; account settings don't have a region restriction feature as described. Option D is incorrect. Network ACL rules and IAM policies are configuration-based rather than policy-based and would require manual implementation across every VPC and user, not scaling as guardrails. Option E is incorrect. AWS Config can only detect and alert on non-compliant resources after they're created; it cannot proactively prevent non-compliant deployments like SCPs and Control Tower guardrails do. Therefore, A and C are the correct answers.
Play from 4:04:52 Question 82. A solutions architect is designing the architecture of a new application being deployed to the AWS Cloud. The application will run on Amazon EC2 On-Demand Instances and will automatically scale across multiple Availability Zones. The EC2 instances will scale up and down frequently throughout the day. An Application Load Balancer (ALB) will handle the load distribution. The architecture needs to support distributed session data management. The company is willing to make changes to code if needed. What should the solutions architect do to ensure that the architecture supports distributed session data management? Here are the options. Option A. Use Amazon ElastiCache to manage and store session data. Option B. Use session affinity (sticky sessions) of the ALB to manage session data. Option C. Use Session Manager from AWS Systems Manager to manage the session. Option D. Use the GetSessionToken API operation in AWS Security Token Service (AWS STS) to manage the session. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Use Amazon ElastiCache to manage and store session data. Amazon ElastiCache provides a distributed, in-memory session store that works seamlessly with horizontally scaled EC2 instances across multiple Availability Zones. As instances scale up and down, all instances can access the same session data from ElastiCache, avoiding session loss. This is the standard pattern for distributed session management in cloud architectures. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Sticky sessions on the ALB tie users to specific instances, defeating the benefits of auto-scaling and causing session loss when instances are terminated. Option C is incorrect. AWS Systems Manager Session Manager is for managing SSH/RDP sessions to EC2 instances, not for application session data management. Option D is incorrect. STS GetSessionToken is for AWS credential management, not for managing application user session data. Therefore, A, Use Amazon ElastiCache to manage and store session data, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:07:33 Question 83. A company runs a web application that is deployed on Amazon EC2 instances in the private subnet of a VPC. An Application Load Balancer (ALB) that extends across the public subnets directs web traffic to the EC2 instances. The company wants to implement new security measures to restrict inbound traffic from the ALB to the EC2 instances while preventing access from any other source inside or outside the private subnet of the EC2 instances. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Configure a route in a route table to direct traffic from the internet to the private IP addresses of the EC2 instances. Option B. Configure the security group for the EC2 instances to only allow traffic that comes from the security group for the ALB. Option C. Move the EC2 instances into the public subnet. Give the EC2 instances a set of Elastic IP addresses. Option D. Configure the security group for the ALB to allow any TCP traffic on any port. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Configure the security group for the EC2 instances to only allow traffic that comes from the security group for the ALB. Security groups can reference other security groups by ID, allowing traffic only from the ALB's security group to the EC2 instances' security group. This implements the principle of least privilege, restricting inbound access to only the ALB while preventing access from any other source inside or outside the subnet, including other EC2 instances in the same private subnet. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Route table rules control routing, not access control; they do not restrict traffic from unauthorized sources. Option C is incorrect. Moving EC2 instances to public subnets defeats the security architecture and exposes them directly to the internet, violating security best practices. Option D is incorrect. Configuring the ALB security group to allow any TCP traffic does nothing to restrict traffic to the EC2 instances and exposes the ALB unnecessarily. Therefore, B, Configure the security group for the EC2 instances to only allow traffic that comes from the security group for the ALB, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:10:13 Question 84. A company uses GPS trackers to document the migration patterns of thousands of sea turtles. The trackers check every 5 minutes to see if a turtle has moved more than 100 yards (91.4 meters). If a turtle has moved, its tracker sends the new coordinates to a web application running on three Amazon EC2 instances that are in multiple Availability Zones in one AWS Region. Recently, the web application was overwhelmed while processing an unexpected volume of tracker data. Data was lost with no way to replay the events. A solutions architect must prevent this problem from happening again and needs a solution with the least operational overhead. What should the solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Amazon S3 bucket to store the data. Configure the application to scan for new data in the bucket for processing. Option B. Create an Amazon API Gateway endpoint to handle transmitted location coordinates. Use an AWS Lambda function to process each item concurrently. Option C. Create an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue to store the incoming data. Configure the application to poll for new messages for processing. Option D. Create an Amazon DynamoDB table to store transmitted location coordinates. Configure the application to query the table for new data for processing. Use TTL to remove data that has been processed. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue to store the incoming data. Configure the application to poll for new messages for processing. Amazon SQS provides a message queue that buffers incoming tracker data, preventing data loss when the application is overwhelmed. The application polls the queue for messages to process at its own pace, decoupling data ingestion from processing. This provides reliable data replay capability and requires minimal operational overhead compared to other solutions. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. S3 is not designed for real-time event processing and doesn't provide the same message delivery guarantees. Option B is incorrect. API Gateway with Lambda adds operational complexity and Lambda's concurrent execution limits may not handle the spike effectively. Option D is incorrect. DynamoDB requires application polling logic and TTL-based cleanup is inefficient for this use case; SQS is purpose-built for this pattern. Therefore, C, Create an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue to store the incoming data. Configure the application to poll for new messages for processing, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:13:37 Question 85. A solutions architect creates a VPC that includes two public subnets and two private subnets. A corporate security mandate requires the solutions architect to launch all Amazon EC2 instances in a private subnet. However, when the solutions architect launches an EC2 instance that runs a web server on ports 80 and 443 in a private subnet, no external internet traffic can connect to the server. What should the solutions architect do to resolve this issue? Here are the options. Option A. Attach the EC2 instance to an Auto Scaling group in a private subnet. Ensure that the DNS record for the website resolves to the Auto Scaling group identifier. Option B. Provision an internet-facing Application Load Balancer (ALB) in a public subnet. Add the EC2 instance to the target group that is associated with the ALEnsure that the DNS record for the website resolves to the ALB. Option C. Launch a NAT gateway in a private subnet. Update the route table for the private subnets to add a default route to the NAT gateway. Attach a public Elastic IP address to the NAT gateway. Option D. Ensure that the security group that is attached to the EC2 instance allows HTTP traffic on port 80 and HTTPS traffic on port 443. Ensure that the DNS record for the website resolves to the public IP address of the EC2 instance. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Provision an internet-facing Application Load Balancer (ALB) in a public subnet. Add the EC2 instance to the target group that is associated with the ALEnsure that the DNS record for the website resolves to the ALB. The requirement is to allow external internet traffic to reach a web server in a private subnet while maintaining security compliance. Option B correctly uses an internet-facing Application Load Balancer in a public subnet to receive external traffic on ports 80 and 443, then routes it to the EC2 instance in the private subnet via a target group. The ALB handles the network translation and provides a single entry point for traffic, meeting both the compliance requirement (instances in private subnets) and the accessibility requirement. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Auto Scaling groups don't enable external traffic to reach instances; they manage scaling. Auto Scaling group identifiers aren't routable endpoints. Option C is incorrect. NAT gateways enable outbound traffic from private subnets but do not accept inbound traffic from the internet. They're designed for outbound-only scenarios. Option D is incorrect. EC2 instances in private subnets don't have public IP addresses by default, and even if assigned one, routing would fail because private subnets lack internet gateway routes for inbound traffic. Therefore, B, Provision an internet-facing Application Load Balancer (ALB) in a public subnet. Add the EC2 instance to the target group that is associated with the ALEnsure that the DNS record for the website resolves to the ALB, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:17:14 Question 86. A gaming company is building an application with Voice over IP capabilities. The application will serve traffic to users across the world. The application needs to be highly available with an automated failover across AWS Regions. The company wants to minimize the latency of users without relying on IP address caching on user devices. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use AWS Global Accelerator with health checks. Option B. Use Amazon Route 53 with a geolocation routing policy. Option C. Create an Amazon CloudFront distribution that includes multiple origins. Option D. Create an Application Load Balancer that uses path-based routing. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Use AWS Global Accelerator with health checks. AWS Global Accelerator provides automated failover across AWS Regions with health checks, ensuring high availability for latency-sensitive applications like VoIP. It uses Anycast IP addresses that don't require client-side IP caching, directing users to the nearest healthy endpoint globally. This meets all requirements: global distribution, automated failover, low latency, and no reliance on IP caching. Route 53 geolocation routing requires DNS resolution time and may rely on caching; CloudFront is for content delivery, not real-time VoIP; and Application Load Balancers only operate within a region. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Route 53 geolocation routing depends on DNS caching and may not provide the fastest failover for real-time VoIP traffic. Option C is incorrect. CloudFront is designed for content delivery, not real-time VoIP applications requiring low-latency bidirectional communication. Option D is incorrect. Application Load Balancers operate only within a single region and do not provide cross-region failover or global distribution. Therefore, A, Use AWS Global Accelerator with health checks, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:19:50 Question 87. A company runs applications on AWS that connect to the company's Amazon RDS database. The applications scale on weekends and at peak times of the year. The company wants to scale the database more effectively for its applications that connect to the database. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Use Amazon DynamoDB with connection pooling with a target group configuration for the database. Change the applications to use the DynamoDB endpoint. Option B. Use Amazon RDS Proxy with a target group for the database. Change the applications to use the RDS Proxy endpoint. Option C. Use a custom proxy that runs on Amazon EC2 as an intermediary to the database. Change the applications to use the custom proxy endpoint. Option D. Use an AWS Lambda function to provide connection pooling with a target group configuration for the database. Change the applications to use the Lambda function. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Use Amazon RDS Proxy with a target group for the database. Change the applications to use the RDS Proxy endpoint. Amazon RDS Proxy manages database connections through connection pooling and multiplexing, allowing applications to establish multiple connections without exhausting the database's connection limit. This efficiently handles scaling workloads with minimal operational overhead since RDS Proxy is fully managed by AWS, no EC2 instances to maintain or custom code to develop. Applications simply change their connection endpoint to point to the RDS Proxy endpoint. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. DynamoDB is a different database service and does not provide connection pooling for RDS; changing to DynamoDB requires major application refactoring. Option C is incorrect. Custom proxies on EC2 require development, maintenance, patching, and operational oversight, adding significant overhead. Option D is incorrect. Lambda is not designed for persistent connection pooling and would introduce latency and complexity rather than reduce operational overhead. Therefore, B, Use Amazon RDS Proxy with a target group for the database. Change the applications to use the RDS Proxy endpoint, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:22:36 Question 88. A company has multiple Microsoft Windows SMB file servers and Linux NFS file servers for file sharing in an on-premises environment. As part of the company's AWS migration plan, the company wants to consolidate the file servers in the AWS Cloud. The company needs a managed AWS storage service that supports both NFS and SMB access. The solution must be able to share between protocols. The solution must have redundancy at the Availability Zone level. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Use Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP for storage. Configure multi-protocol access. Option B. Create two Amazon EC2 instances. Use one EC2 instance for Windows SMB file server access and one EC2 instance for Linux NFS file server access. Option C. Use Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP for SMB access. Use Amazon FSx for Lustre for NFS access. Option D. Use Amazon S3 storage. Access Amazon S3 through an Amazon S3 File Gateway. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Use Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP for storage. Configure multi-protocol access. Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP is purpose-built to support both SMB and NFS protocols simultaneously on the same storage system, allowing protocol-agnostic file sharing. It provides Availability Zone level redundancy through multi-AZ deployment and is a fully managed AWS service, making it ideal for consolidating Windows SMB and Linux NFS file servers. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Using separate EC2 instances for each protocol requires ongoing management and doesn't provide true redundancy or AZ-level fault tolerance. Option C is incorrect. Using separate FSx services (NetApp ONTAP for SMB and Lustre for NFS) prevents protocol sharing on common data. Option D is incorrect. S3 File Gateway provides NFS/SMB access to S3 but cannot serve as a shared protocol-agnostic file system for SMB and NFS clients directly. Therefore, A, Use Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP for storage. Configure multi-protocol access, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:25:32 Question 89. A company wants to add its existing AWS usage cost to its operation cost dashboard. A solutions architect needs to recommend a solution that will give the company access to its usage cost programmatically. The company must be able to access cost data for the current year and forecast costs for the next 12 months. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Access usage cost-related data by using the AWS Cost Explorer API with pagination. Option B. Access usage cost-related data by using downloadable AWS Cost Explorer report .csv files. Option C. Configure AWS Budgets actions to send usage cost data to the company through FTP. Option D. Create AWS Budgets reports for usage cost data. Send the data to the company through SMTP. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Access usage cost-related data by using the AWS Cost Explorer API with pagination. The AWS Cost Explorer API provides programmatic access to current year usage costs and includes forecasting capabilities for the next 12 months. This is the most direct solution for integrating cost data into an operations dashboard, requiring no manual file downloads or email scheduling, and supports pagination for handling large datasets. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Downloadable CSV files require manual retrieval and integration, not suitable for programmatic access. Option C is incorrect. AWS Budgets actions don't directly provide cost data and FTP is an outdated transfer method. Option D is incorrect. AWS Budgets reports sent via SMTP are email-based and not suitable for programmatic access to a dashboard. Therefore, A, Access usage cost-related data by using the AWS Cost Explorer API with pagination, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:27:56 Question 90. A company has one million users that use its mobile app. The company must analyze the data usage in near-real time. The company also must encrypt the data in near-real time and must store the data in a centralized location in Apache Parquet format for further processing. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Amazon Kinesis data stream to store the data in Amazon S3. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics application to analyze the data. Invoke an AWS Lambda function to send the data to the Kinesis Data Analytics application. Option B. Create an Amazon Kinesis data stream to store the data in Amazon S3. Create an Amazon EMR cluster to analyze the data. Invoke an AWS Lambda function to send the data to the EMR cluster. Option C. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to store the data in Amazon S3. Create an Amazon EMR cluster to analyze the data. Option D. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to store the data in Amazon S3. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics application to analyze the data. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to store the data in Amazon S3. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics application to analyze the data. Kinesis Data Firehose automatically delivers data to S3 in Parquet format with built-in encryption support, eliminating the need to manage custom Lambda functions or manual transformations. Kinesis Data Analytics provides near-real-time analysis without requiring a managed cluster, reducing operational overhead. This combination addresses all requirements, near-real-time encryption, centralized Parquet storage, and analysis, with minimal operational complexity. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Lambda invocations add unnecessary operational complexity; Kinesis Data Analytics doesn't natively output to Parquet format without additional processing. Option B is incorrect. EMR clusters require significant operational overhead including cluster management, scaling, and maintenance compared to serverless alternatives. Option C is incorrect. EMR clusters add operational complexity for analysis when Kinesis Data Analytics provides a simpler serverless alternative. Therefore, D, Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream to store the data in Amazon S3. Create an Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics application to analyze the data, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:31:09 Question 91. A company deploys its applications on Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) behind an Application Load Balancer in an AWS Region. The application needs to store data in a PostgreSQL database engine. The company wants the data in the database to be highly available. The company also needs increased capacity for read workloads. Which solution will meet these requirements with the MOST operational efficiency? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Amazon DynamoDB database table configured with global tables. Option B. Create an Amazon RDS database with Multi-AZ deployments. Option C. Create an Amazon RDS database with Multi-AZ DB cluster deployment. Option D. Create an Amazon RDS database configured with cross-Region read replicas. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create an Amazon RDS database with Multi-AZ DB cluster deployment. Amazon RDS Multi-AZ DB cluster deployment provides both high availability across multiple availability zones and dedicated read replicas within the cluster, all managed by AWS with minimal operational complexity. This architecture delivers automatic failover, read capacity expansion, and operational efficiency superior to other options for PostgreSQL on EKS. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. DynamoDB is NoSQL and not PostgreSQL-compatible; global tables add unnecessary complexity for single-region requirements. Option B is incorrect. Multi-AZ deployments provide high availability but do not include separate read replica endpoints for distributed read workload capacity. Option D is incorrect. Cross-Region read replicas add complexity and latency for a single-region deployment and do not address within-region read capacity as efficiently as Multi-AZ DB clusters. Therefore, C, Create an Amazon RDS database with Multi-AZ DB cluster deployment, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:33:41 Question 92. A company runs analytics software on Amazon EC2 instances. The software accepts job requests from users to process data that has been uploaded to Amazon S3. Users report that some submitted data is not being processed Amazon CloudWatch reveals that the EC2 instances have a consistent CPU utilization at or near 100%. The company wants to improve system performance and scale the system based on user load. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Create a copy of the instance. Place all instances behind an Application Load Balancer. Option B. Create an S3 VPC endpoint for Amazon S3. Update the software to reference the endpoint. Option C. Stop the EC2 instances. Modify the instance type to one with a more powerful CPU and more memory. Restart the instances. Option D. Route incoming requests to Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS). Configure an EC2 Auto Scaling group based on queue size. Update the software to read from the queue. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Route incoming requests to Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS). Configure an EC2 Auto Scaling group based on queue size. Update the software to read from the queue. The bottleneck is CPU utilization at 100%, indicating the system cannot process jobs fast enough. Using SQS as a buffer decouples request submission from processing, and Auto Scaling based on queue depth allows the system to dynamically scale EC2 instances up when jobs queue up. The software reads from the queue and processes at its own pace. This solves both scalability and performance issues. Simple load balancing doesn't address the processing bottleneck, S3 VPC endpoints reduce latency but don't scale capacity, and vertical scaling has limits. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Creating copies without queue-based scaling doesn't address the bottleneck; jobs will still back up. Option B is incorrect. S3 VPC endpoints reduce data transfer latency but don't increase processing capacity or handle scaling. Option C is incorrect. Vertical scaling is limited and doesn't provide auto-scaling based on load. Therefore, D, Route incoming requests to Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS). Configure an EC2 Auto Scaling group based on queue size. Update the software to read from the queue, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:36:42 Question 93. A solutions architect is implementing a document review application using an Amazon S3 bucket for storage. The solution must prevent accidental deletion of the documents and ensure that all versions of the documents are available. Users must be able to download, modify, and upload documents. Which combination of actions should be taken to meet these requirements? (Choose two.) Here are the options. Option A. Enable a read-only bucket ACL. Option B. Enable versioning on the bucket. Option C. Attach an IAM policy to the bucket. Option D. Enable MFA Delete on the bucket. Option E. Encrypt the bucket using AWS KMS. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answers are B. Enable versioning on the bucket, and D. Enable MFA Delete on the bucket. B. Enable versioning on the bucket. D. Enable MFA Delete on the bucket. Versioning preserves all versions of documents so deleted or modified documents can be recovered. MFA Delete requires multi-factor authentication to permanently delete object versions, adding an extra layer of protection against accidental deletion. Together, these features prevent accidental data loss while still allowing users to download, modify, and upload documents. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. A read-only ACL would prevent users from uploading and modifying documents, violating the requirements. Option C is incorrect. An IAM policy controls access permissions but does not prevent accidental deletion or preserve versions. Option E is incorrect. KMS encryption protects data at rest but does not prevent accidental deletion or provide version recovery. Therefore, B and D are the correct answers.
Play from 4:38:54 Question 94. A company hosts its application in the AWS Cloud. The application runs on Amazon EC2 instances behind an Elastic Load Balancer in an Auto Scaling group and with an Amazon DynamoDB table. The company wants to ensure the application can be made available in anotherAWS Region with minimal downtime. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements with the LEAST amount of downtime? Here are the options. Option A. Create an Auto Scaling group and a load balancer in the disaster recovery Region. Configure the DynamoDB table as a global table. Configure DNS failover to point to the new disaster recovery Region's load balancer. Option B. Create an AWS CloudFormation template to create EC2 instances, load balancers, and DynamoDB tables to be launched when needed Configure DNS failover to point to the new disaster recovery Region's load balancer. Option C. Create an AWS CloudFormation template to create EC2 instances and a load balancer to be launched when needed. Configure the DynamoDB table as a global table. Configure DNS failover to point to the new disaster recovery Region's load balancer. Option D. Create an Auto Scaling group and load balancer in the disaster recovery Region. Configure the DynamoDB table as a global table. Create an Amazon CloudWatch alarm to trigger an AWS Lambda function that updates Amazon Route 53 pointing to the disaster recovery load balancer. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is A. Create an Auto Scaling group and a load balancer in the disaster recovery Region. Configure the DynamoDB table as a global table. Configure DNS failover to point to the new disaster recovery Region's load balancer. Option A provides the least downtime by pre-deploying infrastructure (Auto Scaling group and load balancer) in the disaster recovery region, eliminating the time needed to create resources during an outage. DynamoDB Global Tables provide automatic replication with minimal latency, and DNS failover (via Route 53) enables quick redirection to the standby region. This active-passive setup minimizes downtime compared to on-demand resource creation. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option B is incorrect. Using CloudFormation templates to launch resources on-demand introduces significant delay during failover as instances must be created and initialized, increasing downtime. Option C is incorrect. While this includes global tables for DynamoDB, creating EC2 and load balancer infrastructure on-demand via CloudFormation still introduces considerable failover latency. Option D is incorrect. While this has pre-deployed infrastructure, using CloudWatch alarms and Lambda to update Route 53 adds complexity and latency compared to direct DNS failover configuration, increasing RTO. Therefore, A, Create an Auto Scaling group and a load balancer in the disaster recovery Region. Configure the DynamoDB table as a global table. Configure DNS failover to point to the new disaster recovery Region's load balancer, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:42:39 Question 95. A company hosts a serverless application on AWS. The application uses Amazon API Gateway, AWS Lambda, and an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL database. The company notices an increase in application errors that result from database connection timeouts during times of peak traffic or unpredictable traffic. The company needs a solution that reduces the application failures with the least amount of change to the code. What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Reduce the Lambda concurrency rate. Option B. Enable RDS Proxy on the RDS DB instance. Option C. Resize the RDS DB instance class to accept more connections. Option D. Migrate the database to Amazon DynamoDB with on-demand scaling. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Enable RDS Proxy on the RDS DB instance. RDS Proxy manages database connection pooling, allowing many Lambda functions to share a smaller pool of database connections. This prevents connection exhaustion during traffic spikes and reduces timeout errors with minimal code changes, as applications can point to the proxy endpoint instead of the database. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Reducing Lambda concurrency would limit application scalability and throughput rather than solving connection timeout issues. Option C is incorrect. Resizing the DB instance class to accept more connections is expensive and does not address the root cause of inefficient connection management. Option D is incorrect. Migrating to DynamoDB requires significant application code changes and may not be suitable for existing PostgreSQL relational queries. Therefore, B, Enable RDS Proxy on the RDS DB instance, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:44:58 Question 96. A development team uses multiple AWS accounts for its development, staging, and production environments. Team members have been launching large Amazon EC2 instances that are underutilized. A solutions architect must prevent large instances from being launched in all accounts. How can the solutions architect meet this requirement with the LEAST operational overhead? Here are the options. Option A. Update the IAM policies to deny the launch of large EC2 instances. Apply the policies to all users. Option B. Define a resource in AWS Resource Access Manager that prevents the launch of large EC2 instances. Option C. Create an IAM role in each account that denies the launch of large EC2 instances. Grant the developers IAM group access to the role. Option D. Create an organization in AWS Organizations in the management account with the default policy. Create a service control policy (SCP) that denies the launch of large EC2 instances, and apply it to the AWS accounts. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is D. Create an organization in AWS Organizations in the management account with the default policy. Create a service control policy (SCP) that denies the launch of large EC2 instances, and apply it to the AWS accounts. AWS Organizations with Service Control Policies (SCPs) provides organization-wide enforcement with minimal operational overhead. A single SCP applied to all accounts prevents large EC2 instance launches across the entire organization, scaling automatically as new accounts are added. This approach requires no per-account configuration and centrally enforces the policy at the organization level, making it the least operationally intensive solution. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Updating IAM policies requires managing policies in each account and for each user/group, creating significant operational overhead as the organization grows. Option B is incorrect. AWS Resource Access Manager is designed for sharing resources between accounts, not for imposing restrictions on instance types. Option C is incorrect. Creating IAM roles in each account with individual developer access requires per-account management and doesn't scale efficiently as team membership changes. Therefore, D, Create an organization in AWS Organizations in the management account with the default policy. Create a service control policy (SCP) that denies the launch of large EC2 instances, and apply it to the AWS accounts, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:48:07 Question 97. A company deploys Amazon EC2 instances that run in a VPC. The EC2 instances load source data into Amazon S3 buckets so that the data can be processed in the future. According to compliance laws, the data must not be transmitted over the public internet. Servers in the company's on-premises data center will consume the output from an application that runs on the EC2 instances. Which solution will meet these requirements? Here are the options. Option A. Deploy an interface VPC endpoint for Amazon EC2. Create an AWS Site-to-Site VPN connection between the company and the VPC. Option B. Deploy a gateway VPC endpoint for Amazon S3. Set up an AWS Direct Connect connection between the on-premises network and the VPC. Option C. Set up an AWS Transit Gateway connection from the VPC to the S3 buckets. Create an AWS Site-to-Site VPN connection between the company and the VPC. Option D. Set up proxy EC2 instances that have routes to NAT gateways. Configure the proxy EC2 instances to fetch S3 data and feed the application instances. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Deploy a gateway VPC endpoint for Amazon S3. Set up an AWS Direct Connect connection between the on-premises network and the VPC. A gateway VPC endpoint for S3 allows EC2 instances to access S3 buckets privately without traversing the public internet. Combined with AWS Direct Connect, which provides a dedicated network connection between on-premises and AWS, this ensures data never travels over the public internet. This satisfies both the S3 upload requirement and the on- premises consumption requirement. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. An interface VPC endpoint for EC2 is unnecessary; Direct Connect alone doesn't provide S3 access without internet routing. Option C is incorrect. Transit Gateway cannot directly replace gateway endpoints for S3, and Site-to-Site VPN may still route through the internet depending on configuration. Option D is incorrect. Proxy EC2 instances with NAT gateways would still route traffic through the public internet, violating the compliance requirement. Therefore, B, Deploy a gateway VPC endpoint for Amazon S3. Set up an AWS Direct Connect connection between the on-premises network and the VPC, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:51:11 Question 98. A company is reviewing a recent migration of a three-tier application to a VPC. The security team discovers that the principle of least privilege is not being applied to Amazon EC2 security group ingress and egress rules between the application tiers. What should a solutions architect do to correct this issue? Here are the options. Option A. Create security group rules using the instance ID as the source or destination. Option B. Create security group rules using the security group ID as the source or destination. Option C. Create security group rules using the VPC CIDR blocks as the source or destination. Option D. Create security group rules using the subnet CIDR blocks as the source or destination. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is B. Create security group rules using the security group ID as the source or destination. Using security group IDs as sources/destinations for inter-tier communication implements the principle of least privilege by allowing traffic only between specific security groups. This is more granular than CIDR blocks and provides better security isolation between application tiers. Security group-to-security group rules are the AWS best practice for implementing least privilege in multi-tier architectures. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Instance IDs are not valid sources or destinations for security group rules; security groups operate at the network level, not instance level. Option C is incorrect. VPC CIDR blocks are too broad and violate the principle of least privilege by allowing more traffic than necessary. Option D is incorrect. Subnet CIDR blocks are also too broad and less precise than security group-based rules for inter-tier communication. Therefore, B, Create security group rules using the security group ID as the source or destination, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:53:35 Question 99. A development team is collaborating with another company to create an integrated product. The other company needs to access an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue that is contained in the development team's account. The other company wants to poll the queue without giving up its own account permissions to do so. How should a solutions architect provide access to the SQS queue? Here are the options. Option A. Create an instance profile that provides the other company access to the SQS queue. Option B. Create an IAM policy that provides the other company access to the SQS queue. Option C. Create an SQS access policy that provides the other company access to the SQS queue. Option D. Create an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) access policy that provides the other company access to the SQS queue. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Create an SQS access policy that provides the other company access to the SQS queue. An SQS access policy (queue policy) is the appropriate mechanism for granting cross- account access to SQS resources. The policy can be attached to the queue itself and specify the other company's AWS account as a principal, allowing them to poll the queue without sharing their own account credentials or permissions. Instance profiles and IAM policies require creating resources in the other company's account, and SNS policies are for SNS resources, not SQS. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Instance profiles are for EC2 instances and grant permissions to resources within an account, not for cross-account access. Option B is incorrect. IAM policies would need to be created in the other company's account and would not grant them access to your queue. Option D is incorrect. SNS access policies are for Amazon SNS resources, not for granting access to SQS queues. Therefore, C, Create an SQS access policy that provides the other company access to the SQS queue, is the correct answer.
Play from 4:56:07 Question 100. A company has an internal application that runs on Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. The EC2 instances are compute optimized and use Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volumes. The company wants to identify cost optimizations across the EC2 instances, the Auto Scaling group, and the EBS volumes. Which solution will meet these requirements with the MOST operational efficiency? Here are the options. Option A. Create a new AWS Cost and Usage Report. Search the report for cost recommendations for the EC2 instances the Auto Scaling group, and the EBS volumes. Option B. Create new Amazon CloudWatch billing alerts. Check the alert statuses for cost recommendations for the EC2 instances, the Auto Scaling group, and the EBS volumes. Option C. Configure AWS Compute Optimizer for cost recommendations for the EC2 instances, the Auto Scaling group and the EBS volumes. Option D. Configure AWS Compute Optimizer for cost recommendations for the EC2 instances. Create a new AWS Cost and Usage Report. Search the report for cost recommendations for the Auto Scaling group and the EBS volumes. Pause the video now if you want time to think about the answer.
The correct answer is C. Configure AWS Compute Optimizer for cost recommendations for the EC2 instances, the Auto Scaling group and the EBS volumes. AWS Compute Optimizer is specifically designed to analyze EC2 instances, Auto Scaling groups, and EBS volumes to provide cost and performance recommendations. It uses machine learning to identify right-sizing opportunities across these resources in a single, integrated tool, providing the most operational efficiency compared to manually searching Cost and Usage Reports or setting up CloudWatch alerts. Now, why are the other options incorrect? Option A is incorrect. Cost and Usage Reports provide cost data but do not automatically generate recommendations; manual analysis is required and lacks the intelligent optimization insights Compute Optimizer provides. Option B is incorrect. CloudWatch billing alerts monitor spending thresholds but do not provide actionable cost optimization recommendations for specific resources. Option D is incorrect. This approach splits recommendations between two tools unnecessarily, reducing operational efficiency; Compute Optimizer alone covers all three resource types. Therefore, C, Configure AWS Compute Optimizer for cost recommendations for the EC2 instances, the Auto Scaling group and the EBS volumes, is the correct answer.


