SAA-C03 Exam Dumps - Amazon Web Services AWS Certified Associate Questions and Answers

This option is the most efficient because it uses AWS Storage Gateway, which is a service that connects an on-premises software appliance with cloud-based storage to provide seamless integrationwith data security features between your on-premises ITenvironment and the AWS storage infrastructure1. It also uses a stored volume gateway, which is a type of volume gateway that stores your primary data locally and asynchronously backs up point-in-time snapshots of your data to Amazon S32. It also runs the Storage Gateway software application on premises and maps the gateway storage volumes to on-premises storage,which enables you to use your existing storage hardware and network infrastructure. It also mounts the gateway storage volumes to provide local access to the data, which ensures that your data is available for low latency access on premises while also getting backed up to AWS. This solution meets the requirement of maintaining local access to all the data while it is backed up on AWS and ensuring that the data backed up on AWS is automatically and securely transferred. Option A is less efficient because it uses AWS Snowball, which is a physical device that lets you transfer large amounts of data into and out of AWS3. However, this does not provide a periodic backup solution, as it requires manual handling and shipping of the device. It also configures on-premises systems to mount the Snowball S3 endpoint to provide local access to the data, which could introduce additional complexity and latency. Option B is less efficient because it uses AWS Snowball Edge, which is a physical device that has onboard storage and compute capabilities for select AWS capabilities. However, this does not provide a periodic backup solution, as it requires manual handling and shipping of the device. It also uses the Snowball Edge file interface to provide on-premises systems with local access to the data, which could introduce additional complexity and latency. Option C is less efficient because it uses AWS Storage Gateway and configures a cached volume gateway, which is a type of volume gateway that stores your primary data in Amazon S3 and retains a copy of frequently accessed data subsets locally. However, this does not provide local access to all the data, as only some datasubsets are cached locally. It also configures a percentage of data to cache locally, which could incur higher costs and complexity than using a stored volume gateway.

To encrypt data at rest in Amazon RDS, you can use the encryption feature of Amazon RDS, which uses AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS). With this feature, Amazon RDS encrypts each database instance with a unique key. This key is stored securely by AWS KMS. You can manage your own keys or use the default AWS-managed keys. When you enable encryption for a DB instance, Amazon RDS encrypts the underlying storage, including the automated backups, read replicas, and snapshots.

Deploy Amazon API Gateway as an HTTPS endpoint and AWS Lambda to process and save the messages to an Amazon DynamoDB table. This option provides a highly available and scalable solution that can easily handle large amounts of data. It also integrates with other AWS services, making it easier to analyze and visualize the data for the security team.

Read replica use cases - You have a production database that is taking on normal load & You want to run a reporting application to run some analytics • You create a Read Replica to run the new workload there • The production application is unaffected • Read replicas are used for SELECT (=read) only kind of statements (not INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE)

https://aws.amazon.com/premiumsupport/knowledge-center/public-load-balancer-private-ec2/

Understanding the Requirement: The robotics company needs a public load balancer to ensure seamless communication with backend services, route traffic based on query strings, and encrypt traffic.

Analysis of Options:

Network Load Balancer with ACM Certificate: NLBs primarily operate at the transport layer (Layer 4) and do not natively support query parameter-based routing, which is a Layer 7 feature.

Gateway Load Balancer with IAM Certificate: Gateway Load Balancers are designed for deploying, scaling, and managing third-party virtual appliances and do not support HTTP path-based or query parameter-based routing.

Application Load Balancer with ACM Certificate: ALBs operate at the application layer (Layer 7), supporting features like query parameter-based routing and SSL/TLS termination with ACM certificates.

Network Load Balancer with IAM Certificate: As with the first option, NLBs do not support query parameter-based routing, making it unsuitable for this requirement.

Best Solution:

Application Load Balancer with ACM Certificate: This option provides the necessary Layer 7 routing capabilities and SSL/TLS termination to meet the requirements for query parameter-based routing and encrypted communication.

This option is the mostefficient because it uses data filters, which are specifications that restrict access to certain data in query results and engines integrated with Lake Formation1. Data filters can be used to implement row-level security and cell-level security, which are techniques to prevent access to portions of the data that contain sensitiveinformation2. Data filters can be applied when granting Lake Formation permissions on a Data Catalog table, and can use PartiQL expressions to filter data based on conditions3. This solution meets the requirement of providing a secure solution to prevent access to portions of the data that contain sensitive information. Option A is less efficient because it uses an IAM role that includes permissions to access Lake Formation tables, which is a way to grant access to data in Lake Formation using IAM policies4. However, this does not provide a way to prevent access to portions of the data that contain sensitive information. Option C is less efficient because it uses an AWS Lambda function that removes sensitive information before Lake Formation ingests the data, which is a way to perform data cleansing or transformation using serverless functions. However, this could involve significant changes to the application code and logic, and could also result in data loss or inconsistency. Option D is less efficient because it uses an AWS Lambda function that periodically queries and removes sensitive information from Lake Formation tables, which is a way to perform data cleansing or transformation using serverless functions. However, this could involve significant changes to the application code and logic, and could also result in data loss or inconsistency.

This option is the most efficient because it uses AWS DataSync, which is a secure, online service that automates and accelerates moving data between on-premises and AWS Storage services1. It also uses DataSync to transfer large amounts of data back and forth between NFS file systems in the two Regions on a periodic basis, which simplifies and speeds up the data transfer process with minimal operational overhead. This solution meets the requirement of transferring large amounts of data back and forth between NFS file systems in the two Regions on a periodic basis with the least operational overhead. Option B is less efficient because it uses AWS Snowball devices, which are physical devices that let you transfer large amounts of data into and out of AWS2. However, this does not provide a periodic data transfer solution, as it requires manual handling and shipping of the devices. Option C is less efficient because it sets up an SFTP server on Amazon EC2, which is a way to provide secure file transfer protocol (SFTP) access to files stored in Amazon S33. However, this does not provide a periodic data transfer solution, as it requires manual initiation and monitoring of the file transfers. Option D is less efficient because it uses AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS), which is a service that helps you migrate databases to AWS quickly and securely. However, this does not provide a data transfer solution for NFS file systems, as it only supports relational databases and non-relational data stores.

Windows file server is on-premise and we need something to replicate the data to the cloud, the only option we have is AWS FSx for Windows File Server. Also, since the information is confidential and sensitive, we also want to make sure that the appropriate users have access to it in a secure manner.https://docs.aws.amazon.com/fsx/latest/WindowsGuide/what-is.html

"Sensitive data redaction replaces personally identifiable information (PII) in the text transcript and the audio file. A redacted transcript replaces the original text with [PII]; a redacted audio file replaces spoken personal information with silence. This parameter is useful for protecting customer information."https://docs.aws.amazon.com/transcribe/latest/dg/call-analytics-insights.html#call-analytics-insights-redaction

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cli/latest/reference/transfer/describe-server.html

This answer is correct because it provides a resilient and durable replacement for the on-premises file share that is compatible with Windows IIS web servers. Amazon FSx for Windows File Server is a fully managed service that provides shared file storage built on Windows Server. It supports the SMB protocol and integrates with Microsoft Active Directory, which enables seamless access and authentication for Windows-based applications. Amazon FSx for Windows File Server also offers the following benefits:

Resilience: Amazon FSx for Windows File Server can be deployed in multiple Availability Zones, which provides high availability and failover protection. It also supports automatic backups and restores, as well as self-healing features that detect and correct issues.

Durability: Amazon FSx for Windows File Server replicates data within and across Availability Zones, and stores data on highly durable storage devices. It also supports encryption at rest and in transit, as well as file access auditing and data deduplication.

Performance: Amazon FSx for Windows File Server delivers consistent sub-millisecond latencies and high throughput for file operations. It also supports SSD storage, native Windows features such as Distributed File System (DFS) Namespaces and Replication, and user-driven performance scaling.

the best solution is to implement Amazon ElastiCache to cache the large datasets, which will store the frequently accessed data in memory, allowing for faster retrieval times. This can help to alleviate the frequent calls to the database, reduce latency, and improve the overall performance of the backend tier.

The most operationally efficient solution to meet these requirements would be to create a backup plan by using AWS Backup to perform nightly backups and copying the backups to another Region. Adding the application's EBS volumes as resources will ensure that the application's EC2 instance configuration and data are backed up, and copying the backups to another Region will ensure that the application is recoverable in a different AWS Region.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/how-to-use-aws-secrets-manager-rotate-credentials-amazon-rds-database-types-oracle/

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

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to store a copy of all new photos in the us-east-1 Region from an S3 bucket in the us-west-1 Region.

Analysis of Options:

Cross-Region Replication: Automatically replicates objects across regions with minimal operational effort once configured.

CORS Configuration: Used for allowing resources on a web page to be requested from another domain, not for replication.

S3 Lifecycle Rule: Manages the transition of objects between storage classes within the same bucket, not for cross-region replication.

S3 Event Notifications with Lambda: Requires additional configuration and management compared to Cross-Region Replication.

Best Solution:

S3 Cross-Region Replication: This solution provides an automated and efficient way to replicate objects to another region, meeting the requirement with the least operational effort.

Understanding the Requirement: The company has petabytes of data in S3 Standard across multiple buckets with varying access frequencies. They do not know the access patterns and need a cost-optimized storage solution with minimal operational effort.

Analysis of Options:

S3 Intelligent-Tiering: This storage class automatically moves data between two access tiers (frequent and infrequent) based on changing access patterns. It incurs a small monitoring and automation charge but eliminates the need to manually move data between storage classes.

S3 Storage Class Analysis Tool: While useful for determining access patterns, this tool requires manual intervention to move objects to the appropriate storage class, which increases operational overhead.

S3 Glacier Instant Retrieval: This storage class is designed for data that is rarely accessed but requires instant retrieval when needed. It may not be suitable for data with unknown and varying access patterns.

S3 One Zone-IA: This is a lower-cost option for infrequently accessed data stored in a single availability zone. It does not provide the same level of durability and availability as other options and requires knowledge of access patterns.

Best Option for Operational Efficiency:

S3 Intelligent-Tiering provides the best balance of cost savings and operational efficiency. It dynamically adjusts to access patterns without manual intervention, ensuring the company is only paying for what they need without the risk of incurring high costs for infrequent access data.

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.

Understanding the Requirement: The company wants to improve caching to enhance website performance while ensuring that stale content is not served for more than a few minutes after a deployment.

Analysis of Options:

Set CloudFront TTL: Setting a short TTL (e.g., 2 minutes) ensures that cached content is refreshed frequently, reducing the risk of serving stale content.

S3 Bucket TTL: This would not control the cache duration for the CloudFront distribution.

Cache-Control Private: This directive is for controlling caching by private caches (e.g., browsers) and is not applicable for CloudFront.

Lambda@Edge: While this can add headers dynamically, it adds complexity and operational overhead.

Cache-Control max-age and CloudFront Invalidation: Setting a longer max-age for objects ensures they are cached longer, reducing load on the origin. Invalidation ensures that updated content is refreshed immediately after deployment.

Best Combination of Caching Methods:

Set the CloudFront default TTL to 2 minutes: This balances caching and freshness of content.

Add a Cache-Control max-age directive of 24 hours and use CloudFront invalidation: This ensures efficient caching while providing a mechanism to clear outdated content immediately after a deployment.

Current Backup Settings: By default, Amazon RDS creates automated backups with a retention period of 7 days.

Regulatory Requirements: The requirement is to retain daily backups for 30 days.

Adjusting Retention Period: You can modify the RDS instance settings to increase the automated backup retention period to 30 days.

Operational Overhead: This solution is the simplest as it leverages existing automated backups and requires minimal intervention.

Implementation: The change can be made via the AWS Management Console, AWS CLI, or AWS SDKs.

References

Amazon RDS Backups:Amazon RDS Documentation

Understanding the Requirement: The order processing system requires multiple independent validation steps, each handled by separate Lambda functions, with each function accessing only the subset of order information it needs. The system should be loosely coupled to accommodate future changes.

Analysis of Options:

Amazon SQS with a new Lambda function for transformation: This involves additional complexity in creating and managing multiple SQS queues and an extra Lambda function for data transformation.

Amazon SNS with message filtering: While SNS supports message filtering, it is more suited for pub/sub messaging patterns rather than event-driven processing requiring fine-grained control over the data sent to each function.

Amazon EventBridge with input transformers: EventBridge is designed for event-driven architectures, allowing for fine-grained control with input transformers that can modify and filter the event data sent to each target Lambda function, ensuring each function receives only the necessary information.

SQS with synchronous Lambda invocations: This approach adds unnecessary complexity with synchronous invocations and is not ideal for an event-driven, loosely coupled architecture.

Best Solution:

Amazon EventBridge with input transformers: This option provides the most flexible, scalable, and loosely coupled architecture, enabling each Lambda function to receive only the required subset of data.

A. Create an Amazon API Gateway REST API. Configure the method to use the Lambda function. Enable IAM authentication on the API. This option is the most operationally efficient as it allows you to use API Gateway to handle the HTTPS endpoint and also allows you to useIAM to authenticate the calls to the microservice. API Gateway also provides manyadditional features such as caching, throttling, and monitoring, which can be useful for a microservice.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to monitor and notify changes to the OU hierarchy with minimal operational overhead.

Analysis of Options:

AWS Control Tower with Account Drift Notifications: AWS Control Tower provides automated account provisioning and governance, including drift detection and notifications for changes in the OU hierarchy.

AWS Control Tower with AWS Config: AWS Config provides resource configuration tracking but is more complex compared to drift notifications directly available in Control Tower.

AWS Service Catalog with CloudTrail: While CloudTrail tracks changes, setting up notification mechanisms involves more operational overhead.

AWS CloudFormation with Drift Detection: Suitable for tracking configuration changes but less efficient for monitoring OU hierarchy changes compared to Control Tower's built-in features.

Best Solution:

AWS Control Tower with Account Drift Notifications: Provides a streamlined and efficient way to detect and notify changes in the OU hierarchy with minimal operational overhead.

Understanding the Requirement: The data science team needs to securely share selective data with the engineering team across multiple AWS accounts with minimal operational overhead.

Analysis of Options:

Copy data to a common account: Involves data duplication and increased storage costs, and requires managing additional permissions.

Lake Formation permissions Grant command: This method can be effective but may involve significant operational overhead if managing permissions across multiple accounts and datasets manually.

AWS Data Exchange: Designed for sharing data externally or between organizations, which adds unnecessary complexity for internal sharing within the same organization.

Lake Formation tag-based access control: Provides a scalable and efficient way to manage access permissions based on tags, allowing fine-grained control and simplified management across accounts.

Best Solution:

Lake Formation tag-based access control: This solution meets the requirements with the least operational overhead, allowing efficient management of cross-account permissions and secure data sharing.

Requirement Analysis: The application must process each credit card data validation request at least once, securely and cost-effectively.

SQS FIFO Queues: Ensures that each message is processed exactly once and in the exact order sent.

AWS Lambda: Using Lambda for event-driven processing ensures scalability and cost-efficiency.

SSE-SQS: Provides encryption at rest using SQS-managed keys, simplifying encryption management.

Implementation:

Set up SQS FIFO queues as the event source for Lambda.

Enable SSE-SQS for encryption.

Ensure the Lambda execution role has the necessary permissions to use the encryption keys.

Conclusion: This combination meets the requirements of security, exact-once processing, and cost-effectiveness.

References

Amazon SQS:Amazon SQS Documentation

AWS Lambda with SQS:Using AWS Lambda with Amazon SQS

S3 Object Lock enables a write-once-read-many (WORM) model for objects stored in Amazon S3. It can help prevent objects from being deleted or overwritten for a fixed amount of time or indefinitely1. S3 Object Lock has two retention modes: governance mode and compliance mode. Compliance mode provides the highest level of protection and prevents any user, including the root user, from deleting or modifying an object version until the retention period expires. To use S3 Object Lock, a new bucket with Object Lock enabled must be created, and a default retention period can be optionally configured for objects placed in the bucket2. To bring existing objects into compliance, they must be recopied into the bucket with a retention period specified.

Option A is incorrect because S3 Versioning and S3 Lifecycle do not provide WORM protection for objects. Moreover, MFA delete only applies to deleting object versions, not modifying them.

Option B is incorrect because governance mode allows users with special permissions to override or remove the retention settings or delete the object if necessary. This does not meet the legal requirement of retaining all data for 7 years.

Option D is incorrect because S3 Batch Operations cannot be used to apply compliance mode retention periods to existing objects. S3 Batch Operations can only apply governance mode retention periods or legal holds. Reference URL: 2: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/object-lock-console.html 3:https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/storage-class-intro.html#sc-dynamic-data-access 4:https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/transfer-acceleration.html 1: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/object-lock.html : https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/object-lock-overview.html : https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/object-lock-managing.html : https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/storage/managing-amazon-s3-access-with-vpc-endpoints-and-s3-access-points/

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to design a scalable and serverless solution for a near-real-time streaming application that experiences high latency due to large amounts of incoming data. The job processing takes about 30 minutes.

Analysis of Options:

Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose: Provides a fully managed service for real-time data streaming and ingestion, allowing for seamless data delivery to destinations such as Amazon S3, Redshift, and Elasticsearch.

AWS Lambda with AWS Step Functions: While suitable for orchestration and lightweight processing, Lambda might not handle long-running jobs (max 15 minutes execution limit) efficiently.

AWS DMS: Primarily used for database migration, not for real-time data ingestion in this context.

Amazon EC2 in Auto Scaling Group: Provides scalability but involves managing servers, which is not serverless and adds operational overhead.

AWS Fargate with ECS: Offers a serverless compute engine for containers, allowing easy scaling and management without managing the underlying infrastructure.

Best Solution:

Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose: For ingesting the streaming data efficiently.

AWS Fargate with ECS: For processing the data in a scalable and serverless manner.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs all EC2 instances to share up-to-date website content with minimal lag time, running behind an Application Load Balancer.

Analysis of Options:

EC2 User Data with ALB: Complex and not scalable as it requires updating each instance manually.

Amazon EFS: Provides a scalable, shared file storage solution that can be mounted by multiple EC2 instances, ensuring all instances have access to the same up-to-date content.

Amazon S3 with EC2 Sync: Involves periodic synchronization which introduces lag and complexity.

Amazon EBS Snapshots: Not suitable for dynamic and frequent updates required by a content management system.

Best Solution:

Amazon EFS: Ensures all EC2 instances have access to a consistent and up-to-date set of website assets with minimal lag time, meeting the requirements effectively.

This solution meets the requirements most cost-effectively because it enables the company to migrate its on-premises NFS data store to AWS without changing the existing applications or workflows. AWS Storage Gateway is a hybrid cloud storage service that provides seamless and secure integration between on-premises and AWS storage. Amazon S3 File Gateway is a type of AWS Storage Gateway that provides a file interface to Amazon S3, with local caching for low-latency access. By setting up an Amazon S3 File Gateway, the company can store and retrieve files as objects in Amazon S3 using standard file protocols such as NFS. The company can also use an Amazon S3 Lifecycle policy to automatically transition the data to the appropriate storage class based on the frequency of access and the cost of storage. For example, the company can use S3 Standard for frequently accessed data, S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) or S3 One Zone-Infrequent Access (S3 One Zone-IA) for less frequently accessed data, and S3 Glacier or S3 Glacier Deep Archive for long-term archival data.

Option A is not a valid solution because AWS Storage Gateway Volume Gateway is a type of AWS Storage Gateway that provides a block interface to Amazon S3, with local caching for low-latency access. Volume Gateway is not suitable for migrating an NFS data store, as it requires attaching the volumes to EC2 instances or on-premises servers using the iSCSI protocol. Option C is not a valid solution because Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) is a fully managed elastic NFS file system that is designed for workloads that require high availability, scalability, and performance. Amazon EFS Standard-Infrequent Access (Standard-IA) is a storage class within Amazon EFS that is optimized for infrequently accessed files, with a lower price per GB and a higher price per access. Using Amazon EFS Standard-IA for migrating an NFS data store would not be cost-effective, as it would incur higher access charges and require additional configuration to enable lifecycle management. Option D is not a valid solution because Amazon EFS One Zone-Infrequent Access (One Zone-IA) is a storage class within Amazon EFS that isoptimized for infrequently accessed files that do not require the availability and durability of Amazon EFS Standard or Standard-IA. Amazon EFS One Zone-IA stores data in a single Availability Zone, which reduces the cost by 47% compared to Amazon EFS Standard-IA, but also increases the risk of data loss in the event of an Availability Zone failure. Using Amazon EFS One Zone-IA for migrating an NFS data store would not be cost-effective, as it would incur higher access charges and require additional configuration to enable lifecycle management. It would also compromise the availability and durability of the data.

 This solution meets the requirements with the least operational overhead because it uses AWS services that are fully managed and scalable. The EventBridge rule can detect the DeleteKey operation from the AWS KMS API and trigger the Systems Manager Automation runbook, which can execute a predefined workflow to cancel the key deletion. The EventBridge rule can also publish an SNS message to the topic that sends an email notification to the administrators. This way, the company can prevent the accidental deletion of KMS keys and notify the administrators of any attempts to delete them.

Option A is not a valid solution because AWS Config rules are used to evaluate the configuration of AWS resources, not to cancel the deletion of KMS keys. Option B is not a valid solution because it requires creating and maintaining a custom Lambda function that has logic to prevent KMS key deletion, which adds operational overhead. Option D is not a valid solution because it only notifies the administrators of the DeleteKey operation, but does not cancel it.

EFS is a standard file system, it scales automatically and is highly available.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to map its IT infrastructure to identify and enforce security policies, with the ability to quickly query and identify security risks.

Analysis of Options:

Amazon RDS: While suitable for relational data, it is not optimized for handling complex relationships and querying those relationships, which is essential for an IT infrastructure map.

Amazon Neptune: A graph database service designed for handling highly connected data. It uses SPARQL to query graph data efficiently, making it ideal for mapping IT infrastructure and identifying relationships that pose security risks.

Amazon Redshift: A data warehouse solution optimized for complex queries on large datasets but not specifically for graph data.

Amazon DynamoDB: A NoSQL database that uses PartiQL for querying, but it is not optimized for complex relationships in graph data.

Best Option for Mapping and Querying IT Infrastructure:

Amazon Neptune provides the most suitable solution with the least operational overhead. It is purpose-built for graph data and enables efficient querying of complex relationships to identify security risks.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to transfer 50 TB of data to AWS with minimal operational overhead and no available network bandwidth for the transfer. The transformation job must continue running in the AWS Cloud.

Analysis of Options:

AWS DataSync and AWS Glue: DataSync is suitable for online data transfer, but there is no available network bandwidth. AWS Glue can be used for data transformation but does not solve the bandwidth issue.

AWS Snowcone: Snowcone is a smaller device suitable for smaller data transfers, and deploying the transformation application on it may not be feasible for 50 TB of data.

AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized with Glue: This device is designed for large data transfers. Copying the data to the device is straightforward, and AWS Glue can handle data transformation in the cloud.

AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized with EC2: This involves setting up EC2 instances for transformation, adding operational complexity compared to using AWS Glue.

Best Solution:

AWS Snowball Edge Storage Optimized with AWS Glue: This provides the least operational overhead for transferring large amounts of data and setting up the transformation job in the cloud.

Requirement Analysis: Need quick, cost-effective, and consistent access to on-premises network services from multiple AWS accounts.

AWS Transit Gateway: Centralizes and simplifies network management by connecting VPCs and on-premises networks.

Direct Connect Integration: Assigning DX to the transit gateway ensures consistent and high-performance connectivity.

Operational Overhead: Minimal because Transit Gateway simplifies routing and management.

Implementation:

Set up AWS Transit Gateway.

Connect new AWS accounts to the Transit Gateway.

Route traffic through Transit Gateway to on-premises servers via Direct Connect.

Conclusion: This solution provides a scalable, cost-effective, and low-overhead method to meet connectivity requirements.

References

AWS Transit Gateway:AWS Transit Gateway Documentation

Understanding the Requirement: The job is stateful, cannot tolerate interruptions, and needs to run reliably for at least one hour each week.

Analysis of Options:

AWS Fargate with Amazon ECS and EventBridge: This option provides a serverless compute engine for containers that can run stateful tasks reliably. Using EventBridge Scheduler, the job can be triggered automatically at the specified time without manual intervention.

AWS Lambda with EventBridge: Lambda functions are not suitable for long-running stateful jobs since they have a maximum execution time of 15 minutes.

EC2 Spot Instances: Spot Instances can be interrupted, making them unsuitable for a stateful job that cannot tolerate interruptions.

AWS DataSync: This service is primarily for moving large amounts of data and is not designed to run stateful analysis jobs.

Best Option for Reliable, Scheduled Execution:

The Fargate task on ECS with EventBridge Scheduler meets all requirements, providing the necessary reliability and scheduling capabilities without interruption risks.

Understanding the Requirement: The application running on EC2 instances in private subnets needs frequent access to large confidential files stored in S3, minimizing data transfer costs.

Analysis of Options:

Gateway Endpoint for S3: Provides a secure, scalable, and cost-effective way for instances in private subnets to access S3 without using the internet or NAT gateways, thus minimizing data transfer costs.

Single NAT Gateway: Incurs additional costs for data transfer through the NAT gateway, which is not cost-effective.

PrivateLink Interface Endpoint for S3: Primarily used for accessing AWS services over a private connection but is more complex and costly compared to a gateway endpoint for S3.

Multiple NAT Gateways: Increases costs significantly and adds complexity without offering the cost benefits of a gateway endpoint.

Best Solution:

Gateway Endpoint for S3: This solution provides the required access with the least data transfer costs and minimal complexity.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to keep daily EBS snapshots for 1 month and retain monthly snapshots for 7 years due to new regulations.

Analysis of Options:

S3 Glacier Deep Archive: Moving snapshots to S3 Glacier Deep Archive involves additional complexity and might not be the most straightforward approach for EBS snapshots.

EBS Snapshots Archive: This is a cost-effective solution designed specifically for long-term storage of EBS snapshots.

Standard Tier for 7 Years: Keeping snapshots in the standard tier for 7 years is more expensive and does not optimize costs.

EBS Direct APIs to S3: This involves additional operational overhead and is not the most cost-effective approach compared to using EBS Snapshots Archive.

Best Solution:

EBS Snapshots Archive: Adding a policy to move monthly snapshots to the EBS Snapshots Archive for long-term retention is the most cost-effective and administratively simple solution.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to collect transaction data in real time, avoid data duplication, and perform additional processing without managing infrastructure.

Analysis of Options:

SQS FIFO Queue with Lambda: Ensures data is processed in order and prevents duplication.Lambda handles processing without the need to manage servers.

SQS FIFO Queue with AWS Batch: While this ensures no duplicates, it introduces additional complexity and management overhead with AWS Batch.

Kinesis Data Streams with AWS Batch and EC2: Involves more components and infrastructure management, which is against the requirement of not wanting to manage infrastructure.

Step Functions with Lambda and EC2: Involves setting up multiple services and still requires managing EC2 instances, increasing complexity.

Best Solution:

SQS FIFO Queue with Lambda: This combination ensures real-time data processing, prevents duplication, and minimizes infrastructure management, meeting all requirements efficiently.

Understanding the Requirement: The application running on EC2 instances in a private subnet needs to process sensitive information from an S3 bucket without using the internet.

Analysis of Options:

Internet Gateway: This would expose the application to the internet, which is not suitable for accessing sensitive information securely.

VPN Connection: VPN is primarily used for secure connections between on-premises networks and AWS VPCs, not for direct S3 access within the same VPC.

NAT Gateway: This allows instances in a private subnet to connect to the internet, but the goal is to avoid internet access.

VPC Endpoint: Provides a private connection between the VPC and S3 without using the internet, ensuring secure access to the S3 bucket.

Best Solution:

VPC Endpoint: Configuring a VPC endpoint allows secure, private communication between the EC2 instances and the S3 bucket without using the internet, ensuring data security and compliance.

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 wants to centrally collect security data with minimal development effort to assess and improve security across all workloads.

Analysis of Options:

Amazon Security Lake: This is a purpose-built service for centralizing security data from across AWS services and third-party sources into a data lake. It provides native integration and requires minimal development effort to set up.

AWS Lake Formation with AWS Glue: While this can be used to create a data lake, it requires more development effort to set up and configure Glue crawlers for ingestion.

AWS Lambda with S3: This approach involves custom development to collect and process security data before storing it in S3, which requires more effort.

AWS DMS to RDS: AWS Database Migration Service is typically used for database migrations and is not suited for collecting and analyzing security data.

Best Option for Minimal Development Effort:

Amazon Security Lake provides the least development effort for setting up a centralized repository for security data. It simplifies data ingestion and management, making it the most efficient solution for this use case.

Understanding the Requirement: The company anticipates a spike in traffic during a holiday and wants to ensure the Auto Scaling group can handle the increased load without impacting performance.

Analysis of Options:

CloudWatch Alarm: This reacts to spikes based on metrics like CPU utilization but does not proactively scale before the anticipated demand.

Recurring Scheduled Action: This allows the Auto Scaling group to scale up based on a known schedule, ensuring additional capacity is available before the expected spike.

Increase Min/Max Instances: This could result in unnecessary costs by maintaining higher capacity even when not needed.

SNS Notification: Alerts on scaling events but does not proactively manage scaling to prevent performance issues.

Best Solution for Proactive Scaling:

Create a recurring scheduled action: This approach ensures that the Auto Scaling group scales up before the peak demand, providing the necessary capacity proactively without manual intervention.

Understanding the Requirement: The application needs to write to multiple block storage volumes in multiple EC2 Nitro-based instances simultaneously to achieve higher availability.

Analysis of Options:

General Purpose SSD (gp3) with Multi-Attach: Supports Multi-Attach but does not provide the highest performance required for critical applications.

Throughput Optimized HDD (st1) with Multi-Attach: Not suitable for applications requiring high performance and low latency.

Provisioned IOPS SSD (io2) with Multi-Attach: Provides high performance and durability, suitable for applications requiring simultaneous writes and high availability.

General Purpose SSD (gp2) with Multi-Attach: Similar to gp3 but with less flexibility and performance.

Best Solution:

Provisioned IOPS SSD (io2) with Multi-Attach: This solution ensures the highest performance and availability for the application by allowing multiple EC2 instances to attach to and write to the same EBS volume simultaneously.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to ensure clients use a TLS certificate when accessing the website and automate the creation and renewal of TLS certificates.

Analysis of Options:

CloudFront Security Policy: Not applicable for creating certificates.

CloudFront Origin Access Control (OAC): Controls access to origins, not relevant for TLS certificate creation.

AWS Certificate Manager (ACM) with DNS Validation: Provides automated certificate management, including creation and renewal, with minimal manual intervention. DNS validation is automated and does not require manual intervention as email validation does.

AWS Certificate Manager (ACM) with Email Validation: Requires manual intervention to approve validation emails, which increases operational effort.

Best Solution:

AWS Certificate Manager (ACM) with DNS Validation: Ensures automated and efficient certificate management with the least operational effort.

Understanding the Requirement: The university wants to centralize management and automate backups for its AWS services (EC2, RDS, and DynamoDB), reducing reliance on custom scripts.

Analysis of Options:

Third-party backup software with AWS Storage Gateway: This solution introduces external dependencies and adds complexity compared to using native AWS services.

AWS Backup: Provides a centralized, fully managed service to automate and manage backups across various AWS services, including EC2, RDS, and DynamoDB.

AWS Config: Primarily used for compliance and configuration monitoring, not for backup management.

AWS Systems Manager State Manager: Useful for configuration management but not specifically designed for managing backups.

Best Solution:

AWS Backup: This service offers the necessary functionality to centralize and automate backups, providing a streamlined and integrated solution with minimal effort.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to copy files generated by an on-premises application to AWS without modifying the application code. The files are stored on an SMB file share and require a low-latency connection to the application servers.

Analysis of Options:

Amazon Elastic File System (EFS): EFS is designed for Linux-based workloads and does not natively support SMB file shares.

Amazon FSx for Windows File Server: FSx supports SMB file shares but would require changes to the application or additional infrastructure to connect on-premises systems.

AWS Snowball: Suitable for large data transfers but not for continuous, low-latency file copying.

AWS Storage Gateway: Provides a hybrid cloud storage solution, supporting SMB file shares and enabling seamless copying of files to AWS without requiring changes to the application.

Best Solution:

AWS Storage Gateway: This service meets the requirement for a low-latency, seamless file transfer solution from on-premises to AWS without modifying the application code.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to redesign the architecture to be highly available and use AWS managed solutions for hosting a web application with static content, PHP application, and Redis for user sessions.

Analysis of Options:

AWS Elastic Beanstalk: Suitable for simplifying deployment but may not provide the desired flexibility and control for complex architectures.

AWS Lambda and API Gateway: Not ideal for hosting a stateful PHP application and handling static content.Adding complexity without significant benefit.

EC2 instance with ElastiCache and S3: Provides some high availability but involves managing EC2 instances, which increases operational overhead.

CloudFront with S3, ALB, ECS with Fargate, and ElastiCache: This solution leverages fully managed AWS services for each component, ensuring high availability and scalability.

Best Solution:

CloudFront with S3, ALB, ECS with Fargate, and ElastiCache: This combination of services meets the requirements for a highly available and managed solution, ensuring optimal performance and minimal operational overhead.

Understanding the Requirements: The company needs to optimize costs and has the flexibility to change EC2 instance types and families frequently (every 2-3 months).

Savings Plans Overview: Savings Plans offer significant savings over On-Demand pricing, with the flexibility to use any instance type and family within a region.

No Upfront Compute Savings Plan: This plan allows for cost optimization without any upfront payment, offering flexibility to change instance types and families.

Term Selection: A 1-year term is appropriate for balancing cost savings and flexibility given the frequent changes in instance types.

Conclusion: A No Upfront Compute Savings Plan for a 1-year term provides the needed flexibility and cost savings without the commitment and inflexibility of Reserved Instances.

References

AWS Savings Plans:AWS Savings Plans

AWS Cost Management Documentation:AWS Cost Management

Requirement Analysis: The product catalog search is causing high CPU utilization on the MySQL DB instance, slowing down the website.

ElastiCache Overview: Amazon ElastiCache for Redis can be used to cache frequently accessed data, reducing load on the database.

Lazy Loading: This caching strategy loads data into the cache only when it is requested, improving response times for repeated queries.

Implementation:

Set up an ElastiCache for Redis cluster.

Modify the application to check the cache before querying the database.

Use lazy loading to populate the cache on cache misses.

Conclusion: This approach reduces database load and improves website performance during product catalog searches.

References

Amazon ElastiCache:ElastiCache Documentation

Caching Strategies:ElastiCache Caching Strategies