SAA-C03 Exam Dumps - AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate (SAA-C03)

This option is the most efficient because it deploys the web tier and the application tier to a second Region, which provides high availability and redundancy for the application. It also uses an Amazon Aurora global database, which is a feature that allows a single Aurora database to span multiple AWS Regions1. It also deploys the database in the primary Region and the second Region, which provides low latency global reads and fast recovery from a Regional outage. It also uses Amazon Route 53 health checks with afailover routing policy to the second Region, which provides data protection by routing traffic to healthy endpoints in different Regions2. It also promotes the secondary to primaryas needed, which provides dataconsistency by allowing write operations in one of the Regions at a time3. This solution meets the requirement of expanding globally and ensuring that its application has minimal downtime. Option A is less efficient because it extends the Auto Scaling groups for the web tier and the application tier to deploy instances in Availability Zones in a second Region, which could incur higher costs and complexity than deploying them separately. It also uses an Aurora global database to deploy the database in the primary Region and the second Region, which is correct. However, it does not use Amazon Route 53 health checks with a failover routing policy to the second Region, which could result in traffic being routed to unhealthy endpoints. Option B is less efficient because it deploys the web tier and the application tier to a second Region, which is correct. It also adds an Aurora PostgreSQL cross-Region Aurora Replica in the second Region, which provides read scalability across Regions. However, it does not use an Aurora global database, which provides faster replication and recovery than cross-Region replicas. It also uses Amazon Route 53 health checks with a failover routing policy to the secondRegion, which is correct. However, it does not promote the secondary to primary as needed, which could result in data inconsistency or loss. Option C is less efficient because it deploys the web tier and the application tier to a second Region, which is correct. It also creates an Aurora PostgreSQL database in the second Region, which provides data redundancy across Regions. However, it does not use an Aurora global database or cross-Region replicas, which provide faster replication and recovery than creating separate databases. It also uses AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to replicate the primary database to the second Region, which provides data migration between different sources and targets. However, it does not use an Aurora global database or cross-Region replicas, which provide faster replication and recovery than using AWS DMS. It also uses Amazon Route 53 health checks with a failover routing policy to the second Region, which is correct.

Option Acombines ECS with Fargate for scalability, RDS for relational data, and SQS for decoupling with message ordering (FIFO queues).

Option Buses SNS, which does not maintain message order.

Option Cis suitable for serverless workflows but not relational data.

Option Drelies on Elastic Beanstalk, which offers less flexibility for scaling.

To achieve high availability for the website, two key actions should be taken:

Amazon RDS for MySQL Multi-AZ: By migrating the database to an RDS for MySQL Multi-AZ deployment, the database becomes highly available. Multi-AZ provides automatic failover from the primary database to a standby replica in another Availability Zone, ensuring database availability even in the case of an AZ failure.

Application Load Balancer and Auto Scaling: Deploying an Application Load Balancer (ALB) in front of the EC2 instances ensures that traffic is evenly distributed across the instances. Configuring an Auto Scaling group to run EC2 instances across multiple Availability Zones ensures that the application remains available even if one instance or one AZ becomes unavailable. This setup enhances fault tolerance and improves reliability.

Why Not Other Options?:

Option A (Internet Gateway per AZ): Internet Gateways are region-wide resources and do not need to be provisioned per Availability Zone. This option does not contribute to high availability.

Option C (DynamoDB + Auto Scaling): DynamoDB would require changes to the application code to switch from MySQL, which is not possible per the question's constraints.

Option D (DataSync): AWS DataSync is used for data transfer and synchronization, not for achieving high availability for a database.

AWS References:

Amazon RDS Multi-AZ Deployments- Explanation of how Multi-AZ deployments work in Amazon RDS.

Application Load Balancing- Details on how to configure and use ALB for distributing traffic across multiple instances.

Amazon Transcribe now supports speaker labeling for streaming transcription. Amazon Transcribe is an automatic speech recognition (ASR) service that makes it easy for you to convert speech-to-text. In live audio transcription, each stream of audio may contain multiplespeakers. Now you can conveniently turn on the ability to label speakers, thus helping to identify who is saying what in the output transcript.https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2020/08/amazon-transcribe-supports-speaker-labeling-streaming-transcription/

The issue in this case is related to the processing tier, where EC2 instances are overwhelmed at peak times, causing delays.Option D, using anAmazon EC2 Auto Scaling target tracking policybased on theApproximateNumberOfMessagesin the SQS queue, is the best solution.

Auto Scaling with Target Tracking:

Target tracking policiesdynamically scale out or in based on a specific metric. For this use case, you can monitor theApproximateNumberOfMessagesin the SQS queue. When the number of messages (orders) in the queue increases, the Auto Scaling group will scale out more EC2 instances to handle the additional load, ensuring that the queue doesn’t build up and cause delays.

This solution is ideal for handling variable and unpredictable peak times, as Auto Scaling can automatically adjust based on real-time load rather than scheduled times.

Why Not the Other Options?:

Option A (Scheduled Scaling): Scheduled scaling works well for predictable peak times, but this company experiencesunpredictable peak usage, making scheduled scaling less effective.

Option B (ElastiCache for Redis): Adding a caching layer would help if DynamoDB were the bottleneck, but in this case, the issue is CPU overload on EC2 instances in the processing tier.

Option C (CloudFront): CloudFront would help cache static content from the web tier, but it wouldn’t resolve the issue of the processing tier’s overloaded EC2 instances.

AWS References:

Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling Target Tracking

Amazon SQS ApproximateNumberOfMessages

For cost-effectiveness and high availability in Amazon EMR workloads, the best approach is to configure atransient cluster(which runs for the duration of the job and then terminates) withOn-Demand Instancesfor the primary and core nodes, andSpot Instancesfor the task nodes. Here's why:

Primary and core nodes on On-Demand Instances: These nodes are critical because they manage the cluster and store data on HDFS. Running them on On-Demand Instances ensures stability and that no data is lost, as Spot Instances can be interrupted.

Task nodes on Spot Instances: Task nodes handle additional processing and can be used with Spot Instances to reduce costs. Spot Instances are much cheaper but can be interrupted, which is fine for non-critical tasks as the framework can handle retries.

Atransient clusteris more cost-effective than a long-running cluster for workloads that only run for 6 hours a day. Transient clusters automatically terminate after the workload completes, saving costs by not keeping the cluster running when it's not needed.

Option A: A long-running cluster may result in unnecessary costs when the cluster isn't being used.

Option C: Running core nodes on Spot Instances risks data loss if the Spot Instances are interrupted, violating the requirement for zero data loss.

Option D: Running both core and task nodes on Spot Instances is highly risky for data-critical workloads.

AWS References:

Amazon EMR Cluster Management

Using Spot Instances in EMR