Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional All Questions

View all questions & answers for the AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional exam

Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional topic 1 question 585 discussion

Exam question from Amazon's AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional

Question #: 585
Topic #: 1

[All AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional Questions]

A company is running a web application with On-Demand Amazon EC2 instances in Auto Scaling groups that scale dynamically based on custom metrics. After extensive testing, the company determines that the m5.2xlarge instance size is optimal for the workload. Application data is stored in db.r4.4xlarge Amazon RDS instances that are confirmed to be optimal. The traffic to the web application spikes randomly during the day.
What other cost-optimization methods should the company implement to further reduce costs without impacting the reliability of the application?

A. Double the instance count in the Auto Scaling groups and reduce the instance size to m5.large.
B. Reserve capacity for the RDS database and the minimum number of EC2 instances that are constantly running.
C. Reduce the RDS instance size to db.r4.xlarge and add five equivalently sized read replicas to provide reliability.
D. Reserve capacity for all EC2 instances and leverage Spot Instance pricing for the RDS database.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B 🗳️

by Nemer at Aug. 11, 2020, 10:28 a.m.

Disclaimers:

- ExamTopics website is not related to, affiliated with, endorsed or authorized by Amazon.
- Trademarks, certification & product names are used for reference only and belong to Amazon.

Comments

Submit Cancel

Nemer

Highly Voted 3 years, 8 months ago

B - is the reasonable option, as there is no point in changing instances sizes that are already optimal, and a spot instance for the db is a bad idea.

upvoted 22 times

...

rasti

Highly Voted 3 years, 8 months ago

Answer is A - to have more smaller instances to better react on dynamic scaling The answer B is not giving you any discount. It's "Reserve capacity", not "Reserved Instance"

upvoted 6 times

bnh_fedi

3 years, 8 months ago

and the minimum number of EC2 instance**

upvoted 2 times

...

QCO

3 years, 8 months ago

Checked the pricing on the m5.2xlarge vs m5.xlarge and they are $0.384 and 0.192 per Hour. There is no further reduction in cost (no savings), however with B, reserving capacity makes cost very granular which can result in cost reduction no matter how little. The question is more focused on cost reduction rather than reliability/performance of the solution

upvoted 4 times

...

3a632a3

Most Recent 1 year, 4 months ago

Selected Answer: B

" further reduce costs without impacting the reliability of the application?" It cannot be A as reducing instance sizes can negatively affect applications that require more CPU or RAM.

upvoted 1 times

...

Jesuisleon

2 years ago

I think B is answer. I do see the link that reserve capacity vs reserve instance. I found some questions are really badly worded, I think in this question reserve capacity means reserve instance.

upvoted 1 times

...

dev112233xx

2 years, 2 months ago

Selected Answer: A

Answer is A Answer can't be B, RESERVED CAPACITY has the same pricing of on-demand and you gonna be charged even when the instance is stopped!! most of the comments here are just to mislead you (probably AWS guys?)

upvoted 1 times

...

AYANtheGLADIATOR

2 years, 9 months ago

B is the answer here is the link . https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/USER_WorkingWithReservedDBInstances.html

upvoted 1 times

...

Nano803

3 years, 4 months ago

Selected Answer: B

I like B

upvoted 1 times

...

cldy

3 years, 6 months ago

B. Reserve capacity for the RDS database and the minimum number of EC2 instances that are constantly running.

upvoted 1 times

...

AzureDP900

3 years, 6 months ago

I will go with B

upvoted 1 times

...

Viper57

3 years, 7 months ago

The answer is clearly B. People are being confused by the term 'reserve capacity'. This is not the same as an on-demand capacity reservation. This article by AWS clearly states that by 'reserving capacity' you are reserving the instances and reducing your costs. See - https://aws.amazon.com/aws-cost-management/aws-cost-optimization/reserved-instances/

upvoted 1 times

...

Kopa

3 years, 7 months ago

Im more for A, costs can be minimal and change more dynamic because for lower model type of instances.

upvoted 1 times

...

jobe42

3 years, 7 months ago

B, the fact that RDS and EC2 is defined here as "optimal", no need to change them, so just reduce the cost with reserved instances for RDS and EC2

upvoted 1 times

...

WhyIronMan

3 years, 7 months ago

I'll go with B You can easily safe money reserving the DB instance and the minimum number of ec2

upvoted 1 times

...

Waiweng

3 years, 7 months ago

it's B

upvoted 3 times

...

ItsmeP

3 years, 7 months ago

Ans B A is incorrect as there is no change in billing if we go with double instance count with half capacity, it can minor degrade performance as well.

upvoted 1 times

...

Kian1

3 years, 7 months ago

going with A

upvoted 1 times

...

ju0n

3 years, 8 months ago

Answer is A. Reserved capacity doesn't offer any billing discount. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/s3-lifecycle-management-update-support-for-multipart-uploads-and-delete-markers/

upvoted 1 times

bnh_fedi

3 years, 8 months ago

and the minimum number of EC2 instance**

upvoted 1 times

...

Load full discussion...