An organization runs a batch processing application on Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling Group. The workload uses memory-optimized `r5.xlarge` instances, each attached to a `` Amazon EBS General Purpose SSD (`gp2`) volume. A Solutions Architect reviews Amazon CloudWatch metrics and notes the following: average CPU utilization is `` during peak operations, average memory utilization is ``, and the EBS volumes are experiencing I/O throttling at ``, leading to high disk I/O wait times. Which configuration change should the Solutions Architect recommend to optimize both compute and storage performance while minimizing costs?
- AModify the Auto Scaling Group launch template to use `r5.2xlarge` instances, and request Application Load Balancer pre-warming from AWS Support to resolve the disk I/O latency during peak periods.
- BConfigure an Amazon RDS Multi-AZ DB instance deployment to offload the active file processing and scale read queries to the standby database instance, reducing EC2 EBS workload.
- Modify the Auto Scaling Group launch template to use `c5.xlarge` instances, and upgrade the EBS volumes to `gp3` with a configuration of `.Cevap
- DMigrate the application to run on AWS Fargate, and purchase EC2 Instance Savings Plans to optimize the Fargate compute costs.
Cevap
Modify the Auto Scaling Group launch template to use `c5.xlarge` instances, and upgrade the EBS volumes to `gp3` with a configuration of `.
The correct answer identifies that the workload is compute-bound rather than memory-bound, meaning a switch from `r5` (memory-optimized) to `c5` (compute-optimized) instances reduces cost while providing the necessary CPU. Furthermore, the storage bottleneck is caused by the `` limitation of the `` `gp2` volume (yielding only ``). Moving to `gp3` provides a baseline of `` immediately, resolving the throttling and improving performance at a lower storage price point.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Compute and Storage Performance Optimization
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s