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

Understanding the Requirement: The company wants to restrict each application to its specific prefix in an S3 bucket and have granular control over the objects under each prefix.

Analysis of Options:

Dedicated S3 Access Points: Provides a scalable and flexible way to manage access to S3 buckets, allowing specific policies to be attached to each access point, thereby controlling access at the prefix level.

S3 Batch Operations: Suitable for large-scale changes but involves more operational overhead and does not dynamically control future access.

Replication to new S3 buckets: Involves unnecessary duplication of data and increased storage costs, and operational overhead for managing multiple buckets.

Combination of replication and access points: Adds unnecessary complexity and overhead compared to using access points directly.

Best Solution:

Dedicated S3 Access Points: This provides the least operational overhead while meeting the requirements for prefix-level access control and granular management.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to migrate sensitive and critical data from on-premises SQL Server databases to AWS, aiming to increase security and reduce operational overhead.

Analysis of Options:

EC2 Instances with KMS: Running SQL Server on EC2 provides control but requires significant operational overhead for management, backups, patching, and high availability.

Multi-AZ Amazon RDS for SQL Server with KMS: Amazon RDS for SQL Server offers managed database services, reducing operational overhead. Multi-AZ deployment provides high availability, and KMS encryption ensures data security.

Amazon S3 and Macie: S3 is not a suitable replacement for relational databases, and Macie is used for data security and compliance but not for database operations.

Amazon DynamoDB and CloudWatch Logs: DynamoDB is a NoSQL database and does not support SQL Server workloads directly. CloudWatch Logs are used for monitoring, not for ensuring database security.

Best Solution:

Multi-AZ Amazon RDS for SQL Server with KMS: This solution meets the requirements for security, high availability, and reduced operational overhead by using a managed database service with encryption.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to mitigate DDoS attacks on its website, which uses AWS Global Accelerator to route traffic to an Application Load Balancer (ALB).

Analysis of Options:

AWS WAF on Global Accelerator: Allows for centralized protection and can block traffic based on rate-based rules, effectively mitigating DDoS attacks with minimal implementation effort.

Lambda Function and VPC Network ACL: Requires custom implementation and ongoing management, increasing complexity and effort.

AWS WAF on ALB: Provides protection but involves additional configuration and management at the ALB level.

CloudFront Distribution in front of Global Accelerator: Adds unnecessary complexity and changes the current traffic flow setup.

Best Solution:

AWS WAF on Global Accelerator: This provides the required protection with the least implementation effort, ensuring effective DDoS mitigation and maintaining the existing architecture.

Understanding the Requirement: The company wants to optimize costs and reduce operational overhead for an RDS for PostgreSQL database that only needs to be active during business hours on weekdays.

Analysis of Options:

Instance Scheduler on AWS: Allows for automated start and stop schedules based on specified times, ideal for resources only needed during certain hours. This directly optimizes costs by running the database only when needed.

Turn off automatic backups and create weekly snapshots: Does not address the requirement of reducing operational overhead and optimizing runtime costs.

Custom Lambda function: This could work but adds unnecessary complexity compared to using the Instance Scheduler.

All Upfront Reserved DB Instances: While this reduces costs, it does not optimize for usage patterns that require the database only during specific hours.

Best Solution:

Instance Scheduler on AWS: This option effectively manages the database runtime based on the specified schedule, reducing costs and operational overhead.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to control the creation, rotation, and disabling of encryption keys for data stored in S3 with minimal effort.

Analysis of Options:

SSE-S3: Provides server-side encryption using S3 managed keys but does not offer full control over key management.

Customer managed key with AWS KMS (SSE-KMS): Allows the company to fully control key creation, rotation, and disabling, providing a high level of security and compliance.

AWS managed key with AWS KMS (SSE-KMS): While it provides some control, it does not offer the same level of granularity as customer-managed keys.

EC2 instance encryption and re-upload: This approach is operationally intensive and does not leverage AWS managed services for efficient key management.

Best Solution:

Customer managed key with AWS KMS (SSE-KMS): This solution meets the requirement for full control over encryption keys with minimal operational overhead, leveraging AWS managed services for secure key management.

Requirement Analysis: The company needs highly available, scalable storage for a document management application without modifying the application during migration.

EFS Overview: Amazon EFS provides scalable file storage that can be mounted concurrently on multiple EC2 instances across different Availability Zones.

EFS Standard-IA: Using the Standard-IA storage class helps reduce costs for infrequently accessed data while maintaining high availability and scalability.

Implementation:

Create an EFS file system.

Configure mount targets in multiple Availability Zones to ensure high availability.

Mount the EFS file system on EC2 instances in the Auto Scaling group.

Conclusion: This solution meets the high availability, scalability, and cost-effectiveness requirements without needing application modifications.

References

Amazon EFS:Amazon EFS Documentation

EFS Storage Classes:Amazon EFS Storage Classes

AWS Glue is a fully managed extract, transform, and load (ETL) service that makes it easy to prepare and load your data for analytics. AWS Glue can automatically discover your data in Amazon S3 and catalog it, so you can query and search the data using SQL. AWS Glue can also run serverless ETL jobs using Apache Spark and Python to transform and load your data into various destinations, such as Amazon Redshift, Amazon Athena, or Amazon Aurora. AWS Glue is a serverless service, so you only pay for the resources consumed by the jobs, and you don’t need to provision or manage any infrastructure.

Amazon Redshift is a fully managed, petabyte-scale data warehouse service that enables you to use standard SQL and your existing business intelligence (BI) tools to analyze your data. Amazon Redshift also supports massively parallel processing (MPP), which means it can distribute and execute queries across multiple nodes in parallel, delivering fast performance and scalability. Amazon Redshift Serverless is a new option that automatically scales query compute capacity based on the queries being run, so you don’t need to manage clusters or capacity. You only pay for the query processing time and the storage consumed by your data.

Amazon Redshift ML is a feature that enables you to create, train, and deploy machine learning (ML) models using familiar SQL commands. Amazon Redshift ML can automatically discover the best model and hyperparameters for your data, and store the model in Amazon SageMaker, a fully managed service that provides a comprehensive set of tools for building, training, and deploying ML models. You can then use SQL functions to apply the model to your data in Amazon Redshift and generate predictions.

The combination of AWS Glue, Amazon Redshift Serverless, and Amazon Redshift ML meets the requirements of the question, as it provides a serverless, scalable, and SQL-based solution to transform, load, and analyze the data from the Amazon S3 data lake, and to create and train ML models on the data.

Option A is not correct, because Amazon EMR is not a serverless service. Amazon EMR is a managed service that simplifies running Apache Spark, Apache Hadoop, and other big data frameworks on AWS. Amazon EMR requires you to launch and configure clusters of EC2 instances to run your ETL jobs, which adds complexity and cost compared to AWS Glue.

Option B is not correct, because Amazon Aurora Serverless is not a data warehouse service, and it does not support MPP. Amazon Aurora Serverless is an on-demand, auto-scaling configuration for Amazon Aurora, a relational database service that is compatible with MySQL and PostgreSQL. Amazon Aurora Serverless can automatically adjust the database capacity based on the traffic, but it does not distribute the data and queries across multiple nodes like Amazon Redshift does. Amazon Aurora Serverless is more suitable for transactional workloads than analytical workloads.

Option D is not correct, because Amazon Athena is not a data warehouse service, and it does not support MPP. Amazon Athena is an interactive query service that enables you to analyze data in Amazon S3 using standard SQL. Amazon Athena is serverless, so you only pay for the queries you run, and you don’t need to load the data into a database. However, Amazon Athena does not store the data in a columnar format, compress the data, or optimize the query execution plan like Amazon Redshift does. Amazon Athena is more suitable for ad-hoc queries than complex analytics and ML.

Understanding the Requirement: The company wants to cost-optimize their workload that uses EC2, Lambda, Fargate, and SageMaker, covering the most services with the fewest savings plans.

Analysis of Options:

EC2 Instance Savings Plan: Limited to EC2 and SageMaker, missing coverage for Lambda and Fargate.

Compute Savings Plan: Provides the most flexibility, covering a broad range of compute services, including EC2, Lambda, Fargate, and SageMaker.

SageMaker Savings Plan: Specifically for SageMaker, missing coverage for EC2, Lambda, and Fargate.

Combination of plans: The Compute Savings Plan is versatile and can be combined to cover different services efficiently.

Best Solution:

Compute Savings Plan for EC2, Lambda, and SageMaker: Covers the primary compute services efficiently.

Compute Savings Plan for Lambda, Fargate, and EC2: Covers the remaining services, ensuring broad coverage with minimal plans.