Data-Engineer-Associate Exam Dumps - Amazon Web Services AWS Certified Data Engineer Questions and Answers

 AWS DataSync is an online data movement and discovery service that simplifies and accelerates data migrations to AWS as well as moving data to and from on-premises storage, edge locations, other cloud providers, and AWS Storage services1. AWS DataSync can copy data to and from various sources and targets, including Amazon S3, and handle files in multiple formats. AWS DataSync also supports incremental transfers, meaning it can detect and copy only the changes to the data, reducing the amount of data transferred and improving the performance. AWS DataSync can automate and schedule the transfer process using triggers, and monitor the progress and status of the transfers using CloudWatch metrics and events1.

AWS DataSync is the most operationally efficient way to transfer the data in this scenario, as it meets all the requirements and offers a serverless and scalable solution. AWS Glue, AWS Direct Connect, and Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration are not the best options for this scenario, as they have some limitations or drawbacks compared to AWS DataSync. AWS Glue is a serverless ETL service that can extract, transform, and load data from various sources to various targets, including Amazon S32. However, AWS Glue is not designed for large-scale data transfers, as it has some quotas and limits on the number and size of files it can process3. AWS Glue also does not support incremental transfers, meaning it would have to copy the entire data set every time, which would be inefficient and costly.

AWS Direct Connect is a service that establishes a dedicated network connection between your on-premises data center and AWS, bypassing the public internet and improving the bandwidth and performance of the data transfer. However, AWS Direct Connect is not a data transfer service by itself, as it requires additional services or tools to copy the data, such as AWS DataSync, AWS Storage Gateway, or AWS CLI. AWS Direct Connect also has some hardware and location requirements, and charges you for the port hours and data transfer out of AWS.

Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration is a feature that enables faster data transfers to Amazon S3 over long distances, using the AWS edge locations and optimized network paths. However, Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration is not a data transfer service by itself, as it requires additional services or tools to copy the data, such as AWS CLI, AWS SDK, or third-party software. Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration also charges you for the data transferred over the accelerated endpoints, and does not guarantee a performance improvement for every transfer, as it depends on various factors such as the network conditions, the distance, and the object size. References:

AWS DataSync

AWS Glue

AWS Glue quotas and limits

[AWS Direct Connect]

[Data transfer options for AWS Direct Connect]

[Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration]

[Using Amazon S3 Transfer Acceleration]

Step 1: Understanding the Problem

The company collects clickstream data via Amazon Kinesis Data Streams and stores it in JSON format in Amazon S3 using Kinesis Data Firehose. They use Amazon Athena to query the data, but they want to reduce Athena costs while maintaining the same data pipeline.

Since Athena charges based on the amount of data scanned during queries, reducing the data size (by converting JSON to a more efficient format like Apache Parquet) is a key solution to lowering costs.

Step 2: Why Option A is Correct

Option A provides a straightforward way to reduce costs with minimal management overhead:

Changing the Firehose output format to Parquet: Parquet is a columnar data format, which is more compact and efficient than JSON for Athena queries. It significantly reduces the amount of data scanned, which in turn reduces Athena query costs.

Custom S3 Object Prefix (YYYYMMDD): Adding a date-based prefix helps in partitioning the data, which further improves query efficiency in Athena by limiting the data scanned to only relevant partitions.

AWS Glue ETL Job for Existing Data: To handle existing data stored in JSON format, a one-time AWS Glue ETL job can combine small JSON files, convert them to Parquet, and apply the YYYYMMDD prefix. This ensures consistency in the S3 bucket structure and allows Athena to efficiently query historical data.

ALTER TABLE ADD PARTITION: This command updates Athena's table metadata to reflect the new partitions, ensuring that future queries target only the required data.

Step 3: Why Other Options Are Not Ideal

Option B (Apache Spark on EMR) introduces higher management effort by requiring the setup of Apache Spark jobs and an Amazon EMR cluster. While it achieves the goal of converting JSON to Parquet, it involves running and maintaining an EMR cluster, which adds operational complexity.

Option C (Kinesis and Apache Flink) is a more complex solution involving Apache Flink, which adds a real-time streaming layer to aggregate data. Although Flink is a powerful tool for stream processing, it adds unnecessary overhead in this scenario since the company already uses Kinesis Data Firehose for batch delivery to S3.

Option D (AWS Lambda with Firehose) suggests using AWS Lambda to convert records in real time. While Lambda can work in some cases, it's generally not the best tool for handling large-scale data transformations like JSON-to-Parquet conversion due to potential scaling and invocation limitations. Additionally, running parallel Glue jobs further complicates the setup.

Step 4: How Option A Minimizes Costs

By using Apache Parquet, Athena queries become more efficient, as Athena will scan significantly less data, directly reducing query costs.

Firehose natively supports Parquet as an output format, so enabling this conversion in Firehose requires minimal effort. Once set, new data will automatically be stored in Parquet format in S3, without requiring any custom coding or ongoing management.

The AWS Glue ETL job for historical data ensures that existing JSON files are also converted to Parquet format, ensuring consistency across the data stored in S3.

Conclusion:

Option A meets the requirement to reduce Athena costs without recreating the data pipeline, using Firehose’s native support for Apache Parquet and a simple one-time AWS Glue ETL job for existing data. This approach involves minimal management effort compared to the other solutions.

 The best solutions to resolve the performance bottleneck and reduce Athena query planning time are to create an AWS Glue partition index and enable partition filtering, and to use Athena partition projection based on the S3 bucket prefix.

AWS Glue partition indexes are a feature that allows you to speed up query processing of highly partitioned tables cataloged in AWS Glue Data Catalog. Partition indexes are available for queries in Amazon EMR, Amazon Redshift Spectrum, and AWS Glue ETL jobs. Partition indexes are sublists of partition keys defined in the table. When you create a partition index, you specify a list of partition keys that already exist on a given table. AWS Glue then creates an index for the specified keys and stores it in the Data Catalog. When you run a query that filters on the partition keys, AWS Glue uses the partition index to quickly identify the relevant partitions without scanning the entire table metadata. This reduces the query planning time and improves the query performance1.

Athena partition projection is a feature that allows you to speed up query processing of highly partitioned tables and automate partition management. In partition projection, Athena calculates partition values and locations using the table properties that you configure directly on your table in AWS Glue. The table properties allow Athena to ‘project’, or determine, the necessary partition information instead of having to do a more time-consuming metadata lookup in the AWS Glue Data Catalog. Because in-memory operations are often faster than remote operations, partition projection can reduce the runtime of queries against highly partitioned tables. Partition projection also automates partition management because it removes the need to manually create partitions in Athena, AWS Glue, or your external Hive metastore2.

Option B is not the best solution, as bucketing the data based on a column that the data have in common in a WHERE clause of the user query would not reduce the query planning time. Bucketing is a technique that divides data into buckets based on a hash function applied to a column. Bucketing can improve the performance of join queries by reducing the amount of data that needs to be shuffled between nodes. However, bucketing does not affect the partition metadata retrieval, which is the main cause of the performance bottleneck in this scenario3.

Option D is not the best solution, as transforming the data that is in the S3 bucket to Apache Parquet format would not reduce the query planning time. Apache Parquet is a columnar storage format that can improve the performance of analytical queries by reducing the amount of data that needs to be scanned and providing efficient compression and encoding schemes. However, Parquet does not affect the partition metadata retrieval, which is the main cause of the performance bottleneck in this scenario4.

Option E is not the best solution, as using the Amazon EMR S3DistCP utility to combine smaller objects in the S3 bucket into larger objects would not reduce the query planning time. S3DistCP is a tool that can copy large amounts of data between Amazon S3 buckets or from HDFS to Amazon S3. S3DistCP can also aggregate smaller files into larger files to improve the performance of sequential access. However, S3DistCP does not affect the partition metadata retrieval, which is the main cause of the performance bottleneck in this scenario5. References:

Improve query performance using AWS Glue partition indexes

Partition projection with Amazon Athena

Bucketing vs Partitioning

Columnar Storage Formats

S3DistCp

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide

Option A (AWS DMS): Lets you replicate only selected tables from Aurora to Redshift. It supports ongoing replication (CDC) and reduces unnecessary data transfers.

Option C (Zero-ETL with Aurora to Redshift): This new integration allows real-time, serverless, and low-maintenance data replication. It's designed to reduce operational overhead drastically.

Other options introduce manual processing or inefficient query access (Option D). Glue workflows (Option E) add unnecessary complexity and lag for near-real-time needs.

“Zero-ETL integration between Amazon Aurora and Redshift enables real-time analytics without building complex pipelines.”

AWS Lake Formation is a service that allows you to easily set up, secure, and manage data lakes. One of the features of Lake Formation is row-level security, which enables you to control access to specific rows or columns of data based on the identity or role of the user. This feature is useful for scenarios where you need to restrict access to sensitive or regulated data, such as customer data from different countries. By registering the S3 bucket as a data lake location in Lake Formation, you can use the Lake Formation console or APIs to define and apply row-level security policies to the data in the bucket. You can also use Lake Formation blueprints to automate the ingestion and transformation of data from various sources into the data lake. This solution requires the least operational effort compared to the other options, as it does not involve creating or moving data, or managing multiple tables, views, or roles. References:

AWS Lake Formation

Row-Level Security

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide, Chapter 4: Data Lakes and Data Warehouses, Section 4.2: AWS Lake Formation

AWS Lake Formation is a service that helps you build, secure, and manage data lakes on Amazon S3. You can use AWS Lake Formation to register the S3 path as a data lake location, and enable fine-grained access control to limit access to the records based on the HR department’s Region. You can use data filters to specify which S3 prefixes or partitions each HR department can access, and grant permissions to the IAM roles of the HR departments accordingly. This solution will meet the requirement with the least operational overhead, as it simplifies the data lake management and security, and leverages the existing IAM roles of the HR departments12.

The other options are not optimal for the following reasons:

A. Use data filters for each Region to register the S3 paths as data locations. This option is not possible, as data filters are not used to register S3 paths as data locations, but to grant permissions to access specific S3 prefixes or partitions within a data location. Moreover, this option does not specify how to limit access to the records based on the HR department’s Region.

C. Modify the IAM roles of the HR departments to add a data filter for each department’s Region. This option is not possible, as data filters are not added to IAM roles, but to permissions granted by AWS Lake Formation. Moreover, this option does not specify how to register the S3 path as a data lake location, or how to enable fine-grained access control in AWS Lake Formation.

E. Create a separate S3 bucket for each Region. Configure an IAM policy to allow S3 access. Restrict access based on Region. This option is not recommended, as it would require more operational overhead to create and manage multiple S3 buckets, and to configure and maintain IAM policies for each HR department. Moreover, this option does not leverage the benefits of AWS Lake Formation, such as data cataloging, data transformation, and data governance.

1: AWS Lake Formation

2: AWS Lake Formation Permissions

AWS Identity and Access Management

Amazon S3

AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) is purpose-built to migrate and continuously replicate data from both AWS-hosted and on-premises databases. It supports full-load (existing data) and change data capture (CDC) for ongoing changes, making it the most cost-effective and operationally simple solution in this scenario.

“DMS supports both full-load and continuous replication via CDC. This enables replicating existing and future data from various sources to a data lake in Amazon S3.”

– Ace the AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate Certification - version 2 - apple.pdf

AWS Glue is not suitable for real-time CDC replication across hybrid environments.

A data mesh approach in AWS typically uses Lake Formation for domain-level access control and Athena for cross-domain querying through federated views. CloudTrail ensures auditing.

“For data mesh architectures, use AWS Lake Formation for fine-grained access control and Athena views for cross-domain analysis. Enable CloudTrail to audit access.”

– Ace the AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate Certification - version 2 - apple.pdf

This ensures scalability, security, and compliance across domains.

The company is facing performance issues loading data into Amazon Redshift because it is issuing separate COPY commands for each data file location. The most efficient way to increase the speed of data ingestion into Redshift without increasing the cost is to use a manifest file.

Option D: Create a manifest file that contains the data file locations. Use a COPY command to load the data into Amazon Redshift.A manifest file provides a list of all the data files, allowing the COPY command to load all files in parallel from different locations in Amazon S3. This significantly improves the loading speed without adding costs, as it optimizes the data loading process in a single COPY operation.

Other options (A, B, C) involve additional steps that would either increase the cost (provisioning clusters, using Glue, etc.) or do not address the core issue of needing a unified and efficient COPY process.

The original query does not return results for all of the products because the year column in the sales_data table is not an integer, but a timestamp. Therefore, the WHERE clause does not filter the data correctly, and only returns the products that have a null value for the year column. To fix this, the data engineer should use the extract function to extract the year from the timestamp and compare it with 2023. This way, the query will return the correct results for all of the products in the sales_data table. The other options are either incorrect or irrelevant, as they do not address the root cause of the issue. Replacing sum with count does not change the filtering condition, adding HAVING clause does not affect the grouping logic, and removing the GROUP BY clause does not solve the problem of missing products. References:

Troubleshooting JSON queries - Amazon Athena (Section: JSON related errors)

When I query a table in Amazon Athena, the TIMESTAMP result is empty (Section: Resolution)

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide (Chapter 7, page 197)