All practice questions

1964 questions

Question 1341Question

An enterprise is designing a new multi-VPC networking environment on AWS. The environment consists of a central egress VPC (`vpc-egress-prod`) and two application spoke VPCs (`vpc-app-a` and `vpc-app-b`) across two Availability Zones in the `us-east-1` Region. An AWS Transit Gateway is deployed to interconnect all VPCs.

The application spoke VPCs host workloads that require:
1. Highly available outbound internet connectivity to download software patches.
2. Private DNS resolution for a domain named `corp.internal`, which is managed via a Route 53 Private Hosted Zone (PHZ) in a shared services AWS account.

Which of the following actions should the solutions architect take to meet these requirements with high availability and minimal operational overhead? (Select TWO.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Associate the Route 53 Private Hosted Zone `corp.internal` directly with both `vpc-app-a` and `vpc-app-b` from the shared services account where the zone is hosted.; Deploy a NAT Gateway in each of the two Availability Zones in `vpc-egress-prod` and configure the Transit Gateway route tables to route outbound internet traffic from the spoke VPCs to the NAT Gateway in the corresponding Availability Zone.

Answer

Associate the Route 53 Private Hosted Zone directly with the spoke VPCs, and deploy a NAT Gateway in each of the two Availability Zones in the egress VPC.
The correct solution involves associating the Private Hosted Zone directly with the spoke VPCs and deploying redundant NAT Gateways across two Availability Zones. Direct association allows local resolution of `corp.internal` via the built-in Route 53 Resolver in each VPC, which minimizes operational overhead and eliminates additional endpoint fees. Deploying one NAT Gateway in each Availability Zone of the egress VPC ensures that an outage in one zone does not impact outbound traffic from the other zone, fulfilling the requirement for high availability.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Address private DNS resolution for `corp.internal` in a multi-account setup.
Authorize and associate the Private Hosted Zone in the shared services account with the consumer spoke VPCs (`vpc-app-a` and `vpc-app-b`).
This allows resources in the spoke VPCs to query the local Route 53 Resolver directly for the private domain, avoiding the complexity and costs of deploying Route 53 Resolver Endpoints.
2
Address outbound internet access requirements with high availability.
Deploy redundancy by placing one NAT Gateway in each of the two Availability Zones inside the egress VPC (`vpc-egress-prod`).
Deploying a single NAT Gateway creates a single point of failure, whereas multi-AZ NAT Gateways prevent a single AZ outage from disabling outbound traffic.
3
Configure the routing topology on the AWS Transit Gateway.
Create static routes in the spoke VPC route tables pointing outbound traffic (`0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0`) to the Transit Gateway, and configure the Transit Gateway to route outbound traffic to the respective NAT Gateways in `vpc-egress-prod`.
This ensures that traffic is distributed appropriately across both Availability Zones to maintain resilience.

Key Concept

Designing a resilient, cost-effective hybrid network architecture on AWS requires understanding Route 53 cross-account Private Hosted Zone association, multi-AZ NAT Gateway redundancy, and Transit Gateway routing capabilities.
Question 1342Question

A corporate e-learning platform uses an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL database to manage course metadata and track real-time user progress. During peak hours, the database experiences high CPU utilization due to frequent read queries for course catalogs and write-heavy updates for user session progress. A solutions architect must implement a caching layer to offload the read traffic and temporarily store session data. The session data requires high availability with automatic failover across Availability Zones, persistence to prevent progress loss, and support for sorting user leaderboard scores. Which caching strategy should the solutions architect implement to meet these requirements with minimal latency?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Implement Amazon ElastiCache for Redis in a Multi-AZ replication group.

Answer

Implement Amazon ElastiCache for Redis in a Multi-AZ replication group.
Implementing Amazon ElastiCache for Redis in a Multi-AZ replication group is the correct approach because Redis natively supports data persistence, multi-AZ replication with failover, and complex data structures like sorted sets, which are required for user leaderboards.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the requirements for the session data cache.
The caching layer must support data persistence, high availability with automatic failover, and sorted sets for leaderboards.
These requirements dictate the choice of caching technology.
2
Evaluate ElastiCache for Memcached against the requirements.
Memcached is ruled out because it lacks persistence, multi-AZ replication, and support for advanced data structures like sorted sets.
Memcached is a simple, non-persistent key-value store.
3
Evaluate ElastiCache for Redis against the requirements.
Redis meets all requirements including Multi-AZ replication, automatic failover, persistence, and sorted sets.
Redis is a robust in-memory data store with advanced capabilities.

Key Concept

Distinguishing between Redis and Memcached caching capabilities for stateful and high-availability workloads.
Question 1343Question

A manufacturing enterprise is planning to migrate its legacy Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platform and associated satellite services to AWS. The migration must be completed within a strict six-month window, and the solutions architect must minimize ongoing administrative overhead. The application portfolio contains the following workloads:

1. Core ERP Web Tier: A Python Django application hosted on Ubuntu virtual machines. The web tier must be migrated with no modifications to its core business logic, but the enterprise wants to eliminate server management and operating system patching.
2. ERP Database: An on-premises Oracle Database instance using proprietary PL/SQL packages. The enterprise wants to eliminate licensing costs by migrating to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL and has allocated a dedicated database engineering team to convert the schema and rewrite database code.
3. Legacy Shipping Integration: A Windows-based service running on Windows Server 2012. The application has no active vendor support, and the source code is unavailable. The system must be migrated as-is with a downtime window of less than one hour.
4. Warehouse Inventory Sync Service: A local synchronization utility that interfaces directly with physical Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) hardware via dedicated physical serial ports in the warehouse.

Which combination of migration strategies represents the most appropriate 7 Rs path for each workload component based on these requirements and constraints?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Core ERP Web Tier: Replatform; ERP Database: Refactor; Legacy Shipping Integration: Rehost; Warehouse Inventory Sync Service: Retain

Answer

Core ERP Web Tier: Replatform; ERP Database: Refactor; Legacy Shipping Integration: Rehost; Warehouse Inventory Sync Service: Retain
The migration strategy mapping of Replatform for the web tier, Refactor for the database, Rehost for the legacy shipping integration, and Retain for the warehouse inventory sync service is correct. Replatforming the web tier to a managed platform or container service removes operating system patching and server management without changing the core business logic. Refactoring the database is required because a heterogeneous migration from Oracle to Aurora PostgreSQL involves converting database schemas and rewriting PL/SQL stored procedures. Rehosting the legacy shipping integration using block-level replication (such as AWS Application Migration Service) allows it to be migrated as-is without source code, meeting the tight downtime window. Retaining the inventory sync service is necessary because it relies on local physical serial ports and hardware connections that cannot be virtualized in the cloud.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the web tier migration requirements.
Identify that the web tier needs to be migrated with no core business logic changes while eliminating operating system patching and server management overhead.
This matches a Replatform strategy (e.g., using a managed platform or container service) rather than a Rehost strategy (which keeps operating system management on the customer) or a Refactor strategy (which would modify application code).
2
Analyze the database migration requirements.
Identify that the database is migrating from Oracle to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL, which involves schema conversion and rewriting proprietary PL/SQL packages.
Because it involves a change in the database engine (heterogeneous migration) requiring code modification and schema translation, it is classified as a Refactor (Re-architect) strategy.
3
Analyze the legacy shipping integration requirements.
Identify that the application has no source code, no vendor support, and must be migrated as-is under a one-hour downtime constraint.
AWS Application Migration Service (MGN) provides block-level replication to lift-and-shift (Rehost) the virtual machine with minimal cutover downtime, making Rehost the ideal choice.
4
Analyze the inventory sync service requirements.
Identify that the service relies on local physical serial ports connected to warehouse PLC hardware.
Because the physical hardware dependencies cannot be virtualized or migrated to the cloud, the service must be Retained on-premises.

Key Concept

Selecting migration strategies (7 Rs) based on application dependencies, code modification constraints, and business goals.
Question 1344Question

A financial services company is designing a high-volume, multi-region Online Transaction Processing (OLTP) application. The primary database cluster will be deployed in the 'us-east-1' region, and a disaster recovery (DR) database cluster must be maintained in the 'us-west-2' region. The business requirements specify a Recovery Time Objective (RTO) of under 2 minutes and a Recovery Point Objective (RPO) of under 5 seconds for the database tier. Additionally, security compliance mandates that all data must be encrypted at rest using encryption keys managed in a centralized security account. An audit team in a separate AWS account needs to run read-only compliance queries against a copy of the database in the 'eu-west-1' region every 24 hours.

Which database and storage strategy meets these requirements with the lowest recovery time and operational overhead?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Deploy an Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL Global Database with the primary cluster in 'us-east-1' and a secondary cluster in 'us-west-2'. Encrypt the database clusters using a Customer Managed Key (CMK) in the centralized security account. In the event of a primary region failure, promote the secondary cluster to primary. To support the audit team, configure a daily automated workflow that takes an Aurora snapshot in 'us-east-1', copies it to 'eu-west-1' using a CMK shared with the analytics account, shares the copied snapshot cross-account, and restores it to a temporary Aurora cluster in 'eu-west-1'.

Answer

The database strategy utilizing Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL Global Database with Customer Managed Keys (CMKs) in a centralized security account, and a daily snapshot copy and share workflow to the audit region, meets all RTO, RPO, encryption, and cross-account access requirements.
The correct strategy uses Amazon Aurora Global Database to achieve the sub-second cross-region replication lag (meeting RPO) and fast promotion of the secondary cluster (meeting RTO). By encrypting the clusters with a Customer Managed Key (CMK), the key policy can be modified to grant cross-account access, which is a requirement for sharing encrypted snapshots. Because snapshots are region-specific, copying the snapshot to the target region using the shared CMK, sharing it, and restoring it there correctly enables cross-account database audit queries.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the RTO and RPO requirements.
Amazon Aurora Global Database provides storage-level replication with lag under 1 second and promotion times under 2 minutes, meeting the 5-second RPO and 2-minute RTO constraints.
Standard RDS cross-region replication is asynchronous and has higher latency, making it unsuitable for strict sub-5-second RPO targets under write-heavy workloads.
2
Identify the correct key management strategy for cross-account snapshot access.
A Customer Managed Key (CMK) in the centralized security account must be used, with its key policy configured to grant decryption permissions to the target accounts.
AWS-managed KMS keys cannot be shared cross-account because their policies are immutable.
3
Design the snapshot sharing workflow across regions and accounts.
Automate snapshot generation in 'us-east-1', copy the snapshot to 'eu-west-1' using a shared CMK, share the copy cross-account to the audit account, and restore the snapshot.
Database snapshots are regional resources and must be copied to the destination region using a shared key before they can be shared and restored.

Key Concept

Multi-region database design using Aurora Global Database combined with cross-account snapshot sharing via Customer Managed KMS Keys (CMKs).
Question 1345Question

A logistics enterprise is establishing a new platform across multiple AWS accounts in the eu-central-1 Region. The architecture requires three production spoke VPCs (vpc-delivery-prod, vpc-warehouse-prod, and vpc-tracking-prod) to communicate with one another for real-time inventory updates. Additionally, these spoke VPCs must connect to the corporate on-premises network via a 10 Gbps AWS Direct Connect connection. The enterprise also requires secure, highly available outbound internet access for all spokes to download software patches, and name resolution for a private DNS zone (corp.internal) hosted in a central shared services account. Which architecture should a solutions architect recommend to satisfy these requirements while preventing single points of failure and minimizing administrative overhead?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Deploy an AWS Transit Gateway and attach the three spoke VPCs, the shared services VPC, and a dedicated egress VPC to it. Associate the Direct Connect Gateway with the Transit Gateway to enable hybrid connectivity. In the egress VPC, deploy NAT Gateways across multiple Availability Zones, and configure the Transit Gateway route tables to route all outbound internet traffic from the spoke VPCs to the egress VPC. Associate the private hosted zone corp.internal with all spoke VPCs, the shared services VPC, and the egress VPC.

Answer

The correct architecture uses AWS Transit Gateway to connect the spoke VPCs, shared services, and egress VPCs, while routing outbound internet traffic to highly available NAT Gateways in the egress VPC and associating the Route 53 Private Hosted Zone with all VPCs in the environment.
The correct architecture leverages AWS Transit Gateway to handle routing between spoke VPCs and the Direct Connect Gateway, as Direct Connect Gateway does not support transitive VPC-to-VPC routing. By routing all 0.0.0.0/0 traffic from the spokes to a centralized egress VPC with NAT Gateways distributed across multiple Availability Zones, the design remains highly available. Finally, associating the Route 53 Private Hosted Zone with all the VPCs ensures that resource DNS queries can be resolved locally within each VPC, as DNS resolution is not transitive over Transit Gateway.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the spoke-to-spoke and hybrid connectivity requirements.
Identify that AWS Transit Gateway is required to support transitive routing between VPCs and to connect to the on-premises network via a Direct Connect Gateway.
Direct Connect Gateway alone does not support transitive VPC-to-VPC routing. A Transit Gateway is necessary to act as a central cloud router.
2
Address the outbound internet access and high availability requirements.
Create a centralized egress VPC containing NAT Gateways deployed across multiple Availability Zones, routing all outbound internet traffic from the spokes through the Transit Gateway.
Centralizing egress traffic simplifies security governance, and deploying NAT Gateways across multiple Availability Zones eliminates any single point of failure for outbound internet connectivity.
3
Address the private DNS resolution requirements.
Associate the Route 53 Private Hosted Zone corp.internal with all the spoke VPCs, the shared services VPC, and the egress VPC.
Route 53 Private Hosted Zone resolution is VPC-local. Because DNS queries do not transit across Transit Gateway attachments, the hosted zone must be explicitly associated with each VPC in the architecture.

Key Concept

Multi-VPC routing transitively via AWS Transit Gateway, high availability NAT Gateway architecture, and Route 53 Private Hosted Zone multi-VPC cross-account associations.
Estimated Time:3m 0s
Question 1346Question

An enterprise runs a multi-tenant SaaS application across multiple member accounts in an AWS Organization with consolidated billing enabled. The application architecture consists of:

* A stateless web tier hosted on Amazon ECS on AWS Fargate across three Availability Zones (AZs) that scales dynamically based on request traffic.
* A legacy queue-processing worker tier running 24/7 on a fleet of 100100 `c6i.2xlarge` EC2 instances (88 vCPUs, 1616 GiB RAM) across three AZs. The application is compiled for x86 architecture and cannot be ported to Graviton due to legacy dependency constraints.
* A batch processing tier utilizing AWS Lambda functions triggered by objects uploaded to Amazon S3.
* Network infrastructure where outbound internet traffic, including data transferred to Amazon S3 and Amazon DynamoDB, is routed through a NAT Gateway in each AZ.

AWS Compute Optimizer and Amazon CloudWatch metrics for the worker tier over the last 30 days show:

* Average CPU utilization is 15%15\%, with a maximum peak of 28%28\%.
* Average memory utilization is 72%72\%, with a maximum peak of 84%84\%.

The Solutions Architect must optimize the infrastructure costs over a 3-year period. The solution must minimize operational management overhead, maintain the high availability SLA across three AZs, and deliver the highest cost savings.

Which combination of actions should the Solutions Architect recommend?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Right-size the EC2 worker tier instances to `m6i.xlarge` (44 vCPUs, 1616 GiB RAM). Create VPC Gateway Endpoints for Amazon S3 and Amazon DynamoDB in the route tables of all VPCs. Purchase a 3-year Compute Savings Plan at the Organization's management account level.

Answer

Right-size the EC2 worker tier instances to m6i.xlarge, create VPC Gateway Endpoints for Amazon S3 and Amazon DynamoDB, and purchase a 3-year Compute Savings Plan at the Organization's management account level.
The correct answer combines proper right-sizing, cost-effective routing, and a flexible commitment model. Moving from `c6i.2xlarge` to `m6i.xlarge` maintains the necessary 1616 GiB RAM to satisfy the 84%84\% peak memory footprint while decreasing the vCPU count from 88 to 44, which is still sufficient to handle the 28%28\% peak CPU demand (equivalent to 2.242.24 vCPUs). Creating VPC Gateway Endpoints for S3 and DynamoDB is a free architectural modification that stops these services from routing traffic through NAT Gateways, eliminating data processing fees. Finally, purchasing a 3-year Compute Savings Plan at the management account level applies discounts to all EC2 instances, ECS Fargate tasks, and Lambda functions across all member accounts, providing the lowest risk and highest discount coverage.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze EC2 utilization metrics to determine the right-sizing target.
The current instances are `c6i.2xlarge` (88 vCPUs, 1616 GiB RAM). Peak CPU utilization is 28%28\% (2.242.24 vCPUs) and peak memory utilization is 84%84\% (13.4413.44 GiB). Since memory must be maintained above 13.4413.44 GiB and CPU needs are low, migrating to `m6i.xlarge` (44 vCPUs, 1616 GiB RAM) meets all resource demands while reducing instance size by 50%50\%.
To optimize costs, instances must be right-sized based on the bottleneck dimension (memory) while ensuring sufficient CPU capacity.
2
Evaluate network data transfer and processing charges.
Traffic to Amazon S3 and DynamoDB is currently routed through NAT Gateways, incurring data processing charges of $0.045 per GB. Implementing free VPC Gateway Endpoints for S3 and DynamoDB bypasses the NAT Gateways entirely for this traffic, reducing network charges without affecting availability.
NAT Gateway processing fees are a common source of high data transfer costs that can be mitigated for free using VPC endpoints.
3
Determine the optimal Savings Plan strategy for a multi-account organization with diverse compute workloads.
The workload consists of EC2, ECS on Fargate, and AWS Lambda. A Compute Savings Plan applies automatically to all three of these compute services across all member accounts within the Organization. Purchasing this at the management account level ensures consolidated application of discount rates.
Compute Savings Plans offer the highest flexibility and cover Fargate and Lambda, unlike EC2 Instance Savings Plans which only cover EC2 and are bound to specific families.

Key Concept

Compute resource optimization requires right-sizing instances based on performance bottlenecks, minimizing network data processing costs via VPC endpoints, and leveraging the flexibility of Compute Savings Plans for heterogeneous compute architectures.
Question 1347Question

A software-as-a-service (SaaS) company hosts a multi-tenant talent management platform on AWS. The application backend runs on AWS Fargate containers behind an Application Load Balancer, and uses an Amazon Aurora Serverless v2 PostgreSQL DB cluster as its primary database. During the annual performance review cycle, the platform experiences a massive, predictable surge in read traffic (exceeding 100,000100,000 queries per second) as users retrieve employee competency profiles. This traffic spike causes the Aurora Serverless v2 DB cluster to scale up to its maximum capacity, resulting in high database CPU utilization (above 90%90\%), increased latency, and significantly higher operational costs. The profiles are updated infrequently but must be retrieved with sub-millisecond latency. The solutions architect must implement a caching solution that is highly available, supports automatic failover, and protects the database from cache-stampede issues if a cache node fails.

Which strategy should the solutions architect implement to resolve these issues?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Deploy an Amazon ElastiCache for Redis replication group in a Multi-AZ configuration with automatic failover enabled, and configure the application to use a cache-aside pattern to read and write profile data.

Answer

Deploy an Amazon ElastiCache for Redis replication group in a Multi-AZ configuration with automatic failover enabled, and configure the application to use a cache-aside pattern to read and write profile data.
The correct strategy is to deploy Amazon ElastiCache for Redis in a Multi-AZ configuration. ElastiCache for Redis provides key-value caching with sub-millisecond response times, replication across availability zones, and automatic failover. Utilizing a cache-aside pattern offloads read requests from the primary database cluster, keeping CPU utilization low, preventing expensive scaling of the Aurora Serverless v2 instances, and protecting the database from cache-stampede issues during node failures.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the caching tier requirements.
The requirements include sub-millisecond read latency, high availability, automatic failover, protection against cache-stampede, and cost control for the underlying database.
This establishes the technical criteria to evaluate potential caching technologies and deployment architectures.
2
Evaluate Amazon ElastiCache engines.
ElastiCache for Redis is selected because it supports replication, multi-AZ deployment with automatic failover, and data persistence. ElastiCache for Memcached is disqualified because it lacks replication and failover features, leaving the database vulnerable to cache-stampede on node failure.
Choosing the correct caching engine ensures compliance with high availability and resilience requirements.
3
Analyze database offloading and cost-saving methods.
A centralized caching tier using a cache-aside pattern handles the read workload outside the database. Directing reads to Multi-AZ standbys is not possible, and local in-memory caching on container instances introduces data inconsistency. EC2 Instance Savings Plans cannot reduce costs for Aurora Serverless or AWS Fargate.
This rules out sub-optimal or non-viable architectural designs for database read-scaling and cost optimization.

Key Concept

Improving Database and Caching Efficiency

Alternative Method

For static or semi-static data, Amazon CloudFront could potentially be used to cache responses at the edge if API endpoints return cache-control headers, but this does not address internal query caching needs directly or protect the database from application-tier stampedes as effectively as ElastiCache.
Estimated Time:2m 30s
Question 1348Question

An organization is planning to migrate a self-managed Oracle database running on Amazon EC2 to an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL DB instance. The migration must involve converting the database schema (including stored procedures) and replicating data with minimal downtime.

Which of the following actions should the organization perform to accomplish this database migration? (Select TWO.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Use the AWS Schema Conversion Tool (AWS SCT) to convert the Oracle database schema and stored procedures into PostgreSQL-compatible definitions.; Use AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to migrate the data from the source Oracle database to the target Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL DB instance.

Answer

Use the AWS Schema Conversion Tool (AWS SCT) to convert the Oracle database schema and stored procedures, and use AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to migrate the data.
For a heterogeneous database migration (Oracle to PostgreSQL), two primary steps are required: converting the schema and migrating the data. The AWS Schema Conversion Tool (AWS SCT) converts the database schema, including stored procedures, views, and other database objects. AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) is then used to perform the data migration, supporting both full load and replication (Change Data Capture) to minimize downtime.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the database schema conversion requirements.
Identify that migrating from Oracle (source) to PostgreSQL (target) is a heterogeneous migration requiring schema translation before data can be loaded.
Heterogeneous database migrations cannot use native replication directly without schema conversion first.
2
Select the appropriate tool for schema and code conversion.
Select AWS Schema Conversion Tool (AWS SCT) to convert database schemas, stored procedures, views, and functions to PostgreSQL-compatible versions.
AWS SCT is the primary AWS tool designed specifically for converting database schemas and application code between different database engines.
3
Select the appropriate service for data replication and migration.
Select AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to perform the initial full load and subsequent Change Data Capture (CDC) to keep the target database in sync with the source.
AWS DMS is designed to migrate data from a source database to a target database, supporting heterogeneous engine replication.

Key Concept

Heterogeneous database migration using AWS Schema Conversion Tool (AWS SCT) for schema conversion and AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) for data migration.
Question 1349Question

A real-estate listing portal uses an Amazon RDS for MySQL database to manage property listings and user-saved search preferences. During peak marketing campaigns, users experience high latency when searching for listings due to read-heavy query volumes. Furthermore, the user-saved search preference feature, which requires session state persistence and multi-AZ replication to prevent data loss, is causing write bottlenecks on the primary database instance. Which two actions should the Solutions Architect take to address these performance issues? (Select TWO.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Deploy an Amazon ElastiCache for Redis cluster with Multi-AZ enabled to store and replicate the user-saved search preferences.; Create Amazon RDS Read Replicas and configure the application's search module to route read-heavy queries to the read replica endpoints.

Answer

Deploying an Amazon ElastiCache for Redis cluster with Multi-AZ enabled to store and replicate the user-saved search preferences, and creating Amazon RDS Read Replicas to offload read-heavy queries from the primary database instance.
The correct strategy involves deploying an Amazon ElastiCache for Redis cluster with Multi-AZ enabled and creating Amazon RDS Read Replicas. Using ElastiCache for Redis satisfies the requirement for session state persistence and multi-AZ replication for user-saved search preferences. Creating RDS Read Replicas offloads read-heavy queries from the primary database instance to reduce search latency.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the workload bottleneck and requirements.
Identify that property listing searches are read-heavy, while user-saved search preferences require replication, persistence, and generate write bottlenecks.
This helps determine the distinct caching and replication solutions required for the two different data types.
2
Evaluate the caching solution for the persistent session data.
Choose ElastiCache for Redis with Multi-AZ because it provides persistence, replication, and high availability, which ElastiCache for Memcached lacks.
Ensures that user-saved preferences are not lost during cache failures or failovers.
3
Offload read-heavy queries from the primary RDS database.
Implement RDS Read Replicas and point the search read traffic to the read replica endpoints.
Reduces CPU utilization on the primary RDS instance and resolves latency issues for users executing listing searches.

Key Concept

Selecting appropriate database caching and scaling technologies based on persistence and read/write requirements.
Estimated Time:2m 30s
Question 1350Question

A digital ticketing company hosts its high-demand event registration application on Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group (ASG) behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB). The instances run in private subnets across 33 Availability Zones. The application requires outbound internet access to interact with external payment processors. Outbound traffic is currently routed through a single NAT Gateway in the first Availability Zone to minimize cost.

During major ticket release events, traffic surges from a baseline of 2,0002,000 requests per minute to over 100,000100,000 requests per minute in less than 22 minutes. During these spikes, users encounter frequent 502 Bad Gateway502\text{ Bad Gateway} and 504 Gateway Timeout504\text{ Gateway Timeout} errors. System logs show the ALB is dropping connections because backend EC2 instances are overwhelmed, and new instances take 55 minutes to bootstrap and become healthy. Additionally, a recent localized outage in the first Availability Zone disrupted payment processing for all healthy instances in the remaining zones.

Which combination of actions will address the scaling delays and the outbound network single point of failure while minimizing compute expenses during idle periods?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Provision a dedicated NAT Gateway in each Availability Zone and update the private subnet route tables. Configure an Auto Scaling group warm pool with instances in the Stopped state, and request that AWS Support pre-warm the Application Load Balancer before scheduled events.

Answer

Provision a dedicated NAT Gateway in each Availability Zone and update the private subnet route tables. Configure an Auto Scaling group warm pool with instances in the Stopped state, and request that AWS Support pre-warm the Application Load Balancer before scheduled events.
The correct architecture combines three key improvements to solve the issues. First, provisioning a dedicated NAT Gateway per Availability Zone and updating private subnet route tables ensures that outbound traffic routes locally, eliminating the single point of failure and ensuring payment processing resilience during a single zone outage. Second, configuring an Auto Scaling group warm pool with instances in the Stopped state keeps pre-initialized instances ready to scale out rapidly, bypassing the 55-minute bootstrap latency while avoiding active compute charges when idle. Third, pre-warming the Application Load Balancer by contacting AWS Support ensures the load balancer has sufficient capacity to handle the 50×50\times traffic surge without dropping connections.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Address the outbound network single point of failure.
Deploy a dedicated NAT Gateway in each Availability Zone and associate them with the respective local subnet route tables.
This ensures that a localized AZ outage does not impact outbound payment gateway communication from the healthy AZs.
2
Resolve the compute scaling latency while controlling costs.
Enable an Auto Scaling group warm pool with instances in the Stopped state.
Instances are pre-bootstrapped and ready to start rapidly, bypassing the 55-minute initialization delay, while stopped instances do not incur EC2 compute charges.
3
Prevent connection drops at the entry point during flash traffic spikes.
Submit a request to AWS Support to pre-warm the Application Load Balancer prior to scheduled events.
This ensures the load balancer is pre-provisioned with enough capacity to handle the immediate 50×50\times increase in requests.

Key Concept

Implementing Auto Scaling and Fault Tolerance
Question 1351Question

A financial technology startup has a decentralized application environment where multiple development teams manage separate AWS accounts. The startup stores transaction ledger exports in an Amazon S3 bucket located in a centralized auditing account. To meet strict regulatory standards, the compliance team requires that all ledger exports be encrypted at rest using a customer-managed KMS key that undergoes annual rotation. The keys must be controlled centrally, but write permissions must be delegated to the application roles in the member accounts, while preventing any account from disabling the key or modifying the key policy.

Which combination of actions will meet these compliance requirements? (Select TWO.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Create a customer-managed KMS key in the centralized auditing account, enable automatic key rotation, and configure the key policy to delegate root-level access to the auditing account while explicitly granting kms:GenerateDataKey permissions to the member account IAM roles.; Apply a Service Control Policy (SCP) at the AWS Organizations root that denies kms:DisableKey, kms:ScheduleKeyDeletion, and kms:PutKeyPolicy actions across all member accounts, except when performed by the centralized security administration role.

Answer

Create a customer-managed KMS key in the centralized auditing account with cross-account access granted to member roles and automatic rotation enabled, and apply a Service Control Policy (SCP) at the root level of the organization that prevents unauthorized modification or deletion of the KMS keys.
To encrypt S3 objects cross-account with KMS, you must use a customer-managed key since AWS-managed keys (like aws/s3) cannot have their policies modified to allow cross-account access. The key policy in the auditing account must grant the member account roles permissions like kms:GenerateDataKey. To prevent deletion or alteration of key settings across the organization, an SCP should be used to restrict administrative key operations to the centralized security role.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Determine key management capabilities.
Identify that a customer-managed KMS key is required since AWS-managed keys (e.g., aws/s3) cannot be shared or modified for cross-account access.
To allow application roles in member accounts to encrypt objects uploaded to the auditing account, the KMS key must support cross-account key policy configurations.
2
Configure the key policy for access delegation.
Grant write capabilities (kms:GenerateDataKey) to the member account roles in the central customer-managed key policy, and enable automatic annual rotation.
Cross-account KMS usage requires explicit authorization in the key policy of the target key.
3
Implement governance guardrails.
Apply a Service Control Policy (SCP) denying kms:DisableKey, kms:ScheduleKeyDeletion, and kms:PutKeyPolicy to all member accounts.
SCPs ensure centralized control by preventing local administrators from disabling keys or modifying key policies, satisfying the security policy requirement.

Key Concept

Cross-account KMS key sharing with KMS key policy delegation and Organization Service Control Policy (SCP) administrative guardrails.
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 1352Question

A DevOps engineer is configuring a multi-account CI/CD pipeline using AWS Organizations. The pipeline is hosted in a Shared Services account and uses AWS CodePipeline to deploy resources into a Production account using AWS CloudFormation. The pipeline stores its build artifacts in an Amazon S3 bucket in the Shared Services account. The S3 bucket is encrypted using the default AWS-managed KMS key (aws/s3). During the deployment stage, the CloudFormation execution role in the Production account attempts to retrieve the build artifacts but fails with an Access Denied error. Which of the following actions will resolve this deployment failure?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Configure the S3 bucket in the Shared Services account to use a Customer Managed Key (CMK) instead of the default AWS-managed key, and update the key policy to allow the IAM role in the Production account to decrypt the artifacts.

Answer

Configure the S3 bucket in the Shared Services account to use a Customer Managed Key (CMK) instead of the default AWS-managed key, and update the key policy to allow the IAM role in the Production account to decrypt the artifacts.
To resolve the Access Denied issue in a cross-account deployment pipeline, the S3 bucket containing the artifacts must be encrypted with a Customer Managed Key (CMK). The key policy of the CMK must then be configured to allow the external Production account's IAM role to perform the kms:Decrypt action. AWS-managed keys cannot be shared cross-account.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the root cause of the cross-account decryption failure.
The default AWS-managed key aws/s3 cannot be used across different AWS accounts because its key policy is non-modifiable.
AWS-managed keys only allow access from within the same AWS account.
2
Create and configure a Customer Managed Key (CMK) in the Shared Services account.
A new KMS key is created with a customizable key policy.
A CMK allows explicit cross-account access to be defined in its key policy.
3
Update the key policy of the CMK and configure S3 encryption.
The Production account's IAM role is granted kms:Decrypt access, and the S3 bucket is updated to use the new CMK.
This enables the cross-account deployment pipeline to securely retrieve and decrypt deployment artifacts.

Key Concept

Cross-account AWS KMS key sharing with Customer Managed Keys in CI/CD pipelines
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 1353Question

An enterprise manages a multi-account AWS environment under an organization in AWS Organizations with consolidated billing enabled. The environment comprises the following workloads:

* Account A (Web Portal): Runs a critical web application 24/724/7 on Amazon EC2 `m6i.large` instances (2 vCPUs2\text{ vCPUs}, 8 GiB8\text{ GiB} memory) behind an Application Load Balancer. CloudWatch metrics indicate that average CPU utilization is consistently below 15%15\%, and peak memory utilization never exceeds 3.2 GiB3.2\text{ GiB}.
* Account B (Video Processing): Runs dynamic video transcoding jobs on AWS Fargate (configured with task allocations equivalent to `c6g.large`) and triggers AWS Lambda functions for metadata extraction. This workload is highly variable and spikey.
* Account C (Analytics): Runs an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL database instance (`db.r6g.xlarge`, 4 vCPUs4\text{ vCPUs}, 32 GiB32\text{ GiB} memory) with an average CPU utilization of 8%8\%, and freeable memory consistently around 26 GiB26\text{ GiB}. It also runs several Amazon EC2 `r6g.xlarge` instances for ad-hoc business intelligence reporting, which are active only on weekdays from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.

Currently, both Account A and Account B route all outbound traffic to public Amazon S3 and DynamoDB endpoints through a single NAT Gateway deployed in a single Availability Zone (AZ) within their respective VPCs to minimize hourly fees.

The company wants to optimize costs across all accounts while maintaining high availability (HA) for all workloads and minimizing operational overhead. Which of the following solutions represents the most cost-effective and architecturally sound optimization strategy?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Right-size the EC2 instances in Account A to `m6i.medium` and the RDS database in Account C to `db.r6g.large`. Deploy Gateway VPC Endpoints for Amazon S3 and DynamoDB in the VPCs of Account A and Account B, and configure a NAT Gateway in each utilized Availability Zone. Implement AWS Instance Scheduler to shut down Account C's EC2 instances outside of business hours. Purchase a Compute Savings Plan at the organization's management account level to cover the right-sized 24/7 EC2 instances, Fargate tasks, and Lambda functions.

Answer

Right-size the EC2 instances in Account A to `m6i.medium` and the RDS database in Account C to `db.r6g.large`. Deploy Gateway VPC Endpoints for Amazon S3 and DynamoDB in the VPCs of Account A and Account B, and configure a NAT Gateway in each utilized Availability Zone. Implement AWS Instance Scheduler to shut down Account C's EC2 instances outside of business hours. Purchase a Compute Savings Plan at the organization's management account level to cover the right-sized 24/7 EC2 instances, Fargate tasks, and Lambda functions.
The correct solution right-sizes the underutilized instances based on the monitored metrics (halving the size of the EC2 instances in Account A and the RDS instance in Account C). It replaces the single NAT Gateway bottleneck with Gateway VPC Endpoints for S3 and DynamoDB to eliminate data transfer charges for those high-volume services, while deploying multi-AZ NAT Gateways to ensure high availability for remaining internet-bound traffic. It uses AWS Instance Scheduler to shut down the reporting EC2 instances in Account C when they are not in use, which yields greater savings than running them 24/7 under a Savings Plan. Finally, purchasing a Compute Savings Plan at the management account level allows the discount to apply flexibly across EC2, Fargate, and Lambda workloads across all member accounts.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze CloudWatch utilization metrics to identify right-sizing opportunities.
Determine that Account A's EC2 instances can be downsized from `m6i.large` to `m6i.medium` (since CPU <15%< 15\% and memory 3.2 GiB\leq 3.2\text{ GiB}), and Account C's RDS database can be downsized from `db.r6g.xlarge` to `db.r6g.large` (since CPU is 8%8\% and freeable memory is 26 GiB26\text{ GiB}).
Right-sizing directly reduces the on-demand cost by 50%50\% for these resources before applying any commitment discounts.
2
Evaluate the cost and availability configuration of the NAT Gateways and endpoints.
Deploy Gateway VPC Endpoints for S3 and DynamoDB to route traffic locally and avoid NAT Gateway processing fees. Add a NAT Gateway per Availability Zone to remove the single point of failure for remaining internet traffic.
Gateway VPC endpoints are free and eliminate data transfer costs to S3/DynamoDB, while multi-AZ NAT Gateways satisfy the high availability requirement.
3
Evaluate the utilization schedule for the ad-hoc reporting instances in Account C.
Determine that the instances are active only 4040 hours per week (24%24\% of the week). Shutting them down outside of business hours using AWS Instance Scheduler saves approximately 76%76\% of the instance cost.
Stopping the instances provides greater savings than keeping them running 24/7 under any Savings Plan discount.
4
Determine the appropriate Savings Plan type to cover the remaining predictable workloads across accounts.
Purchase a Compute Savings Plan at the Organization management account level.
Compute Savings Plans apply flexibly across EC2, Fargate, and Lambda workloads regardless of region, instance family, or size, and consolidated billing automatically shares the benefit across all member accounts.

Key Concept

Combining right-sizing, scheduling for transient workloads, Gateway VPC endpoints for S3/DynamoDB to eliminate NAT costs, multi-AZ NAT Gateways for high availability, and Compute Savings Plans for heterogeneous/serverless compute workloads across a multi-account AWS Organization.
Question 1354Question

A media broadcasting company is planning to migrate its regional digital asset archiving and distribution portfolio to AWS. The portfolio consists of the following components:

1. A web ingest API tier running on custom-compiled Linux binaries that requires low-latency processing and has no source code or build pipeline documentation available.
2. A metadata database running on Microsoft SQL Server 2019 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server 2016, utilizing proprietary CLR (Common Language Runtime) integrations, which must remain on SQL Server due to vendor compliance, but needs to eliminate OS-level licensing and management overhead.
3. A cold-storage legacy tape-archiving daemon that integrates with local physical storage area networks (SAN) via proprietary Fibre Channel protocol, which must remain on-premises due to compliance and hardware dependency.

The migration must be completed within a strict three-month timeline, and the company requires minimal operational overhead for database management.

Which two of the following migration strategies correctly align with these requirements?

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Rehost the web ingest API tier using AWS Application Migration Service (MGN), and replatform the metadata database to Amazon RDS for SQL Server.; Retain the legacy tape-archiving daemon on-premises, and replatform the metadata database to Amazon RDS for SQL Server.

Answer

The correct answer is to rehost the web ingest API tier using AWS Application Migration Service (MGN) and replatform the metadata database to Amazon RDS for SQL Server, while retaining the legacy tape-archiving daemon on-premises.
The correct choices correctly identify the 7 Rs migration paths based on the constraints. First, the web ingest API tier has no source code or build documentation and must be migrated within a tight timeline, which makes a lift-and-shift (Rehost) using AWS Application Migration Service (MGN) the most appropriate choice. Second, the metadata database requires Microsoft SQL Server due to vendor compliance and proprietary CLR integrations, but the customer wants to reduce OS-level management. Migrating it to Amazon RDS for SQL Server is a Replatform strategy that meets these requirements. Third, the tape-archiving daemon has physical dependencies (Fibre Channel SAN) and compliance constraints that prevent it from being migrated, requiring it to be left on-premises under a Retain strategy.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the constraints and characteristics of the web ingest API tier.
Identify Rehost as the correct strategy.
Because there is no source code or build pipeline documentation available, and the migration timeline is limited to three months, containerizing or refactoring is high-risk. A direct lift-and-shift (Rehost) using AWS Application Migration Service (MGN) is required.
2
Analyze the metadata database requirements and constraints.
Identify Replatform (Amazon RDS for SQL Server) as the correct strategy.
Vendor compliance mandates SQL Server, and proprietary CLR integrations are used, ruling out database engine refactoring. The requirement to eliminate OS-level management and licensing overhead points to a managed service, making Amazon RDS for SQL Server (Replatform) the optimal choice.
3
Analyze the legacy tape-archiving daemon requirements.
Identify Retain as the correct strategy.
The daemon has physical hardware dependencies (Fibre Channel SAN) and compliance constraints requiring it to remain on-premises, meaning it cannot be migrated to AWS.
4
Match the identified strategies to the options.
Select the correct combination options.
The options containing the API rehost, the daemon retention, and the database replatform correctly reflect these valid migration decisions.

Key Concept

Assess and Select Migration Strategy (7 Rs)
Question 1355Question

A logistics firm is organizing its cloud footprint using AWS Organizations. The security team requires that all member accounts under the Dev-Sandbox Organizational Unit (OU) be blocked from launching Amazon Redshift clusters to control costs. However, developers in these sandbox accounts must retain full administrative privileges for all other AWS services to test new features. The solution must be managed centrally and minimize administrative overhead. Which strategy should a solutions architect recommend to meet these requirements with the least operational overhead?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Attach a Service Control Policy (SCP) to the Dev-Sandbox OU containing a Deny rule for the redshift actions, while keeping the local IAM policies in the member accounts unchanged.

Answer

Attach a Service Control Policy (SCP) to the Dev-Sandbox OU containing a Deny rule for the redshift actions, while keeping the local IAM policies in the member accounts unchanged.
Attaching a Service Control Policy (SCP) with a Deny statement directly to the target Organizational Unit (OU) is the most operationally efficient strategy. Explicit Deny statements in SCPs override any local permissions (including local administrator access) without requiring manual changes to existing IAM policies, users, or roles in the member accounts.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the requirement to restrict access to a specific AWS service centrally across multiple accounts under a specific OU.
Identified that AWS Organizations Service Control Policies (SCPs) are designed for centralized permission guardrails.
SCPs apply to OUs or accounts and filter the maximum permissions that can be exercised within those scopes.
2
Determine the impact of SCPs on existing administrator permissions in member accounts.
An explicit Deny rule in an SCP overrides any local Allow rules, including local AdministratorAccess permissions, without needing to modify the local IAM configurations.
In AWS IAM and Organizations evaluation logic, an explicit Deny always supersedes any Allow.
3
Review the alternative options for compliance and operational efficiency.
Eliminated options attempting to share policies via AWS RAM, manage local federation role mappings, or grant permissions solely via SCPs due to technical limitations and operational overhead.
Ensures the selected approach leverages native, supported, and low-overhead AWS mechanisms.

Key Concept

Service Control Policies (SCPs) define the maximum available permissions for member accounts in an AWS Organization, allowing central administrators to establish guardrails that cannot be bypassed by local account administrators.
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Question 1356Question

A financial services firm utilizes AWS Organizations to manage a multi-account environment. A central tooling account hosts an AWS CodePipeline that deploys infrastructure updates using AWS CloudFormation StackSets to multiple member accounts. Security audits have highlighted two major issues:

1. When the pipeline runs, member accounts fail to retrieve the CloudFormation template artifacts from the central Amazon S3 bucket in the tooling account because the bucket is encrypted using an AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) key.
2. Developers are making manual modifications (such as changing security group rules and EC2 instance types) directly in the member accounts, resulting in configuration drift that is not captured by the central templates.

Which of the following actions should a Solutions Architect implement to resolve the cross-account pipeline failures and establish automated drift detection? (Select TWO.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Encrypt the central S3 bucket using an AWS KMS Customer Managed Key (CMK) in the tooling account, and configure its key policy to grant the StackSet execution role in the member accounts permissions for the kms:Decrypt and kms:GenerateDataKey actions, while updating the S3 bucket policy to allow cross-account read access.; Deploy the cloudformation-stack-drift-detection-check AWS Config rule across all member accounts using an AWS Organizations conformance pack, and configure an Amazon EventBridge rule in each member account to detect non-compliant events and trigger an AWS Systems Manager Automation runbook that runs drift detection.

Answer

Encrypt the central S3 bucket using a Customer Managed Key (CMK) with appropriate key and S3 bucket policies to allow cross-account access, and deploy the cloudformation-stack-drift-detection-check AWS Config rule via Organizations conformance packs to trigger drift alerting through EventBridge and Systems Manager.
Resolving cross-account decryption requires using a Customer Managed Key (CMK) in the tooling account because its key policy can be modified to trust external member account roles. The S3 bucket policy must also explicitly allow read access to the member accounts. Automated drift detection is best achieved centrally using AWS Config conformance packs across the Organization, allowing individual member accounts to flag deviations and trigger automated event workflows via Systems Manager Automation.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Address the cross-account encryption requirements.
Transition the S3 bucket encryption from an AWS-managed key to a Customer Managed Key (CMK) in the tooling account.
AWS-managed keys (aws/s3) cannot be shared across different accounts because their key policies cannot be modified to trust external accounts.
2
Configure permissions for the S3 bucket and the CMK.
Grant the StackSet execution role in the member accounts permission to decrypt and generate data keys in the CMK policy, and allow read access in the S3 bucket policy.
For cross-account access to encrypted S3 objects, the accessing principal needs permissions granted in both the destination account (via the KMS key policy and S3 bucket policy) and local IAM policies.
3
Set up automated configuration monitoring.
Deploy the AWS Config rule cloudformation-stack-drift-detection-check to all accounts in the organization via conformance packs.
Using Organization-level conformance packs ensures that every member account automatically conforms to compliance monitoring standards.
4
Automate notifications and drift handling.
Set up Amazon EventBridge rules to target NON_COMPLIANT events from the Config rule, directing them to Systems Manager Automation.
This establishes a hands-free alerting and remediation trigger when resource drift occurs.

Key Concept

Cross-account KMS authorization patterns combined with multi-account AWS Config compliance automation.
Question 1357Question

A company is designing a new multi-AZ workload in the us-east-1 Region. The architecture consists of application servers deployed in private subnets across two Availability Zones (us-east-1a and us-east-1b) within a single VPC (vpc-app). These servers must securely initiate outbound connections to the internet to download software updates. The design must ensure that the workload remains resilient to Availability Zone outages and that an issue in one Availability Zone does not disrupt outbound connectivity for servers in the other zone. Which of the following networking designs should a solutions architect recommend to meet these requirements?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Deploy one NAT Gateway in a public subnet in us-east-1a and another NAT Gateway in a public subnet in us-east-1b. Configure the route table for the private subnet in us-east-1a to route outbound traffic through the NAT Gateway in us-east-1a, and configure the route table for the private subnet in us-east-1b to route outbound traffic through the NAT Gateway in us-east-1b.

Answer

Deploy one NAT Gateway in a public subnet in each Availability Zone and configure the route tables of the private subnets to route outbound traffic through their respective local NAT Gateway.
Deploying one NAT Gateway in each Availability Zone and configuring local subnet routing ensures that outbound internet connectivity is fully resilient to Availability Zone outages, preventing any single point of failure.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the high availability requirement for outbound traffic across Availability Zones.
Determine that outbound traffic must be insulated from single Availability Zone failures.
The scenario requires that an issue in one Availability Zone does not disrupt outbound connectivity for servers in the other zone.
2
Evaluate NAT Gateway deployment topologies for zone-level redundancy.
Identify that deploying a NAT Gateway in each Availability Zone prevents cross-AZ single points of failure.
Pointing private subnet route tables to a local NAT Gateway in the same zone limits the impact of an outage to that zone.
3
Validate alternative routing and resolution options against data plane egress capabilities.
Reject Direct Connect Gateway and Route 53 configurations as invalid solutions for internet egress.
Direct Connect Gateway does not support transitive 0.0.0.0/0 routing, and Route 53 Private Hosted Zones only handle DNS queries rather than data packets.

Key Concept

Deploying redundant NAT Gateways per Availability Zone to prevent cross-AZ single points of failure for internet egress.
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 1358Question

An enterprise is planning to migrate its core media management and delivery platform to AWS within a strict 6-month timeline. The platform consists of four distinct components:

1. A Transcoding Engine running on-premises Windows Server VMs. It relies on custom GPU-accelerated libraries requiring specific OS kernel modifications. To meet the deadline, it must be migrated with no changes to the OS environment or application code.
2. A User Profiles Database running on self-managed PostgreSQL instances. The enterprise wants to eliminate the administrative overhead of OS patching and backup management but must keep the PostgreSQL database engine without modifying the application code or schema.
3. A Legacy Licensing Server that uses a physical USB hardware security dongle connected directly to an on-premises host. The software vendor does not support network-based or virtual licensing mechanisms.
4. A Metadata Catalog running on a commercial Oracle Database. The enterprise wants to eliminate licensing costs and modernize the database tier. The migration team has verified that the schema and application SQL queries can be converted to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL using the AWS Schema Conversion Tool (SCT), and has allocated development resources to rewrite the incompatible application code.

Which combination of migration strategies represents the most appropriate alignment with the AWS 7 Rs framework for these components?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Transcoding Engine: Rehost; User Profiles Database: Replatform; Legacy Licensing Server: Retain; Metadata Catalog: Refactor

Answer

Transcoding Engine: Rehost; User Profiles Database: Replatform; Legacy Licensing Server: Retain; Metadata Catalog: Refactor
The correct strategy alignment maps each component to its ideal 7 Rs path based on the constraints: Rehosting the Transcoding Engine preserves custom OS-level GPU configurations under tight timelines; Replatforming the User Profiles Database shifts management overhead to Amazon RDS without modifying code; Retaining the Licensing Server is necessary due to physical USB hardware licensing restrictions; Refactoring the Metadata Catalog allows database modernization and cost savings by migrating from Oracle to Aurora PostgreSQL, which requires schema conversion and code rewrite.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the requirements for the Transcoding Engine.
Identify that the Transcoding Engine has OS kernel-level modifications and custom GPU requirements, and must be migrated without changes. This aligns with the Rehost (lift-and-shift) strategy to Amazon EC2 GPU instances.
Rehosting allows quick migration of workloads without application or OS-level modifications.
2
Analyze the requirements for the User Profiles Database.
Identify that the database engine remains PostgreSQL but needs to move to a managed service to reduce administrative overhead without database schema or application code changes. This aligns with the Replatform (lift, tinker, and shift) strategy to Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL.
Replatforming replaces the infrastructure hosting platform with a managed service (RDS) without changing the core application code or database engine.
3
Analyze the constraints of the Legacy Licensing Server.
Determine that the Licensing Server requires physical hardware (USB dongle) that cannot be migrated to the virtualized cloud environment and cannot use network licensing. This aligns with the Retain strategy.
Workloads with physical dependencies that cannot be virtualized or migrated must be retained on-premises.
4
Analyze the requirements for the Metadata Catalog.
Identify that migrating from Oracle to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL requires schema conversion (AWS SCT) and application code modification to eliminate licensing costs and modernize the application. This aligns with the Refactor (re-architect) strategy.
Refactoring involves modifying the application and database architecture to adopt cloud-native features, which includes database engine changes and schema rewrites.

Key Concept

Selecting the appropriate AWS 7 Rs migration strategy (Rehost, Replatform, Refactor, Retain, Retire, Repurchase, Relocate) based on technical dependencies, business constraints, and database engines.
Estimated Time:3m 0s
Question 1359Question

A company needs to migrate 450 TB450\text{ TB} of archived media files from its on-premises Network Attached Storage (NAS) to Amazon S3. The company has a dedicated outbound internet connection of 50 Mbps50\text{ Mbps} that is shared with other business operations, and the migration must be completed within 30 days. Which migration method should a solutions architect recommend to transfer this data to Amazon S3 within the required timeline?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Order multiple AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices, copy the data locally to the devices, and ship them back to AWS for import into the Amazon S3 bucket.

Answer

Order multiple AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices, copy the data locally to the devices, and ship them back to AWS for import into the Amazon S3 bucket.
The correct option is to use multiple AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices. Because transferring 450 TB450\text{ TB} over a 50 Mbps50\text{ Mbps} connection would take more than two years, utilizing physical Snowball Edge devices is the only viable method to complete the migration within the 30-day timeline.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Calculate the theoretical network transfer time for the dataset over the available bandwidth.
Transferring 450 TB450\text{ TB} of data over a 50 Mbps50\text{ Mbps} network connection requires approximately 7.2×107 seconds7.2 \times 10^7\text{ seconds} (over 800 days) under ideal conditions, which exceeds the 30-day requirement.
Determining network transfer time helps identify whether online transfer methods (such as DataSync or SFTP) are feasible.
2
Evaluate physical data transfer options using AWS Snow Family.
Using multiple AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized devices allows the data to be copied locally at high speed and shipped to AWS, completing the migration within a few weeks.
Offline shipping bypasses the network bandwidth constraint entirely, easily meeting the 30-day timeline.

Key Concept

Selecting offline vs. online data transfer mechanisms based on dataset size, network bandwidth, and project timelines.
Question 1360Question

A logistics tracking company hosts its core API services in the us-east-1 Region. The system consists of an Application Load Balancer (ALB) that routes traffic to Amazon EC2 instances across three Availability Zones. The EC2 instances process coordinates and call external mapping services via a single NAT Gateway located in a single public subnet. The backend database is an Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL DB cluster. To enhance reliability and design a disaster recovery (DR) solution, the company is targeting the us-west-2 Region. The business requires a recovery time objective (RTO) of 1515 minutes and a recovery point objective (RPO) of 55 minutes. The network architecture in us-east-1 must also be made resilient to Availability Zone outages. Which combination of actions should a Solutions Architect recommend to satisfy these requirements? (Select TWO.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Convert the Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL database to an Amazon Aurora Global Database with the primary cluster in us-east-1 and a secondary cluster in us-west-2.; Deploy an individual NAT Gateway in each of the three public subnets in us-east-1. Configure the private subnet route tables to route outbound traffic through the NAT Gateway located in the corresponding Availability Zone.

Answer

To meet the reliability and disaster recovery goals, the database should be converted to an Amazon Aurora Global Database to achieve low-latency cross-region replication, and a NAT Gateway should be deployed in each public subnet of the primary region to eliminate single Availability Zone dependencies for outbound traffic.
Converting the database to an Amazon Aurora Global Database provides physical replication to the secondary region with sub-second replication lag and rapid promotion, ensuring both the 55-minute RPO and the 1515-minute RTO are satisfied. Deploying a NAT Gateway in each Availability Zone ensures that the failure of a single zone does not impact the outbound internet access of instances in the remaining zones, eliminating the single point of failure.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the database replication requirements for the secondary region.
Identify that the replication lag must be less than 55 minutes to satisfy the RPO constraint, and failover must occur within 1515 minutes to satisfy the RTO constraint.
This establishes the database parameters required to support the target DR objectives.
2
Select the cross-region database replication mechanism.
Choose Amazon Aurora Global Database, which offers physical replication with sub-second lag and fast promotion capabilities.
Aurora Global Database meets the RPO of 55 minutes and supports an RTO of less than 1515 minutes through managed failover.
3
Evaluate the network path for outbound internet connectivity in the primary region.
Identify that routing all private subnets through a single NAT Gateway creates a single point of failure if that subnet or its Availability Zone fails.
Outbound connectivity must remain operational for the other zones during a single Availability Zone outage.
4
Design high availability for outbound traffic.
Deploy three NAT Gateways (one per public subnet in each Availability Zone) and update the private route tables to route outbound traffic through their local NAT Gateway.
This isolates Availability Zone network paths, preventing a failure in one zone from affecting outbound traffic in other zones.

Key Concept

Disaster Recovery pattern implementation and high availability network path engineering
PreviousPage 68 / 99Next
All practice questions — AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional | Examkin