Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate SAA-C02 topic 1 question 121 discussion

B is the correct answer. Points to be noted in Q: 1. Question itself states " What should a solution architect recommend as replacement database?" 2. " users experience latency" when backup is taken from SQL Server. This means an alternate DB needs to be considered. Migrating to Aurora will eliminate this latency. For SQL Server, I/O activity is suspended briefly during backup - https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/USER_CreateSnapshot.html 3. Elasticity, availability, replicas - everything is provided by Aurora

Amazon RDS for SQL Server has started to support READ Replicas, so Answer D is correct. https://aws.amazon.com/rds/features/read-replicas/

wait, B suggest they are already using RDS. the question does not say that. so why use both RDS and Aurora. So either A or D. I would go with D

D is the answer

If money is not a concern, Always chose Aurora over RDS for a job both can do. RDS can do all the jobs Aurora can do and even more, yet Amazon still built Aurora- that tells you everything. Option B is the best for this job with "heavy read" operation, cost is not a concern, willing to change DB.

even chatGPT agrees with B For heavy read activity, Amazon Aurora is a good option as it provides high performance and scalability. It is also compatible with Microsoft SQL Server, so it can be easily migrated. Aurora is a fully managed, MySQL and PostgreSQL compatible, relational database engine that combines the speed and availability of high-end commercial databases with the simplicity and cost-effectiveness of open source databases. To reduce the latency experienced by users during the database copy process, the architect could recommend implementing a database snapshot, which is a point-in-time copy of the database. This can be done without impacting the performance of the production database, and the copy can be used for testing purposes. Alternatively, a read replica can be used to offload read traffic from the production database while maintaining a copy of the data.

Changing database engine is not easier options so better to find option with existing DB engine . D is the right option

not 100% sure about b, "The company wants to explore alternate database options ", means I can use arura to change the type of database to mysql or posgres?

non-technical explanation: Amazon can't say, my db is better Microsoft DB. or Oracle DB. if they say?, Microsoft will be angry :D . that is why I will select "D"

The question is asking for a replacement to decrease the latency and to boost availability. It also says that changing the database engine is an option. Aurora is the best choice in that sense. One might argue that the current DB is SQL server and it is not compatible, I would say that it is possible to migrate the SQL server to Aurora by using DMS and SCT. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/prescriptive-guidance/latest/patterns/migrate-a-microsoft-sql-server-database-to-aurora-mysql-by-using-aws-dms-and-aws-sct.html

D all the way

D as mixed terminology in B?. "Aurora DB and restoring RDS snapshot"?

Adding weight to B for all the reasons specified below.

B for all the reasons below. No-one wants to stun a DB

DDDDDDD

DDDDDDDDDDDDDD

https://aws.amazon.com/cn/rds/aurora/babelfish/