Exam AWS DevOps Engineer Professional topic 1 question 10 discussion

since its minimal changes, stick with Aurora

minimal changes, so change to dynamodb may need schema change, C makes more sense.

C, Single Product Catalog: Using Aurora with read replicas allows you to maintain a single source of truth for your product catalog that can be accessed across multiple regions. Read replicas can help distribute the read load and provide faster access to the catalog. Regional Customer Information: Setting up additional local Aurora instances in each region for customer information and purchases ensures that sensitive data remains compliant with local regulations while allowing the application to scale regionally. This approach minimizes application changes because you can leverage the existing Aurora database structure and simply configure the necessary replicas and local instances.

I will go with C To meet the company’s requirements with the least amount of application changes, the company should use Aurora with read replicas for the product catalog and additional local Aurora instances in each region for the customer information and purchases 1. This approach will ensure that the company has a single product catalog across all regions while keeping customer information and purchases in each region for compliance purposes. Option A is incorrect because Amazon Redshift is not designed for storing product catalogs. Option B is incorrect because Amazon DynamoDB global tables are not designed for storing product catalogs. Option D is incorrect because Amazon DynamoDB global tables are not designed for storing customer information and purchases. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/AuroraUserGuide/Concepts.DBInstanceClass.html

C because LEAST amount of changes. DB is already aurora.

Due to least amount of changes needed, the answer is C.

c for me

C. Use Aurora with read replicas for the product catalog and additional local Aurora instances in each region for the customer information and purchases.

Go C -1

if you have developed with both SQL-like databases, i.e.: RDS, Aurora, and with DynamoDB, you should know the database schema design and CRUD operations are VASTLY different between SQL and DynamoDB.

I'll go with C) The question wants "LEAST amount of application changes", so ANY option with includes DynamoDB (even for half portion) will require a LOT of changes.

C. Use Aurora with read replicas for the product catalog and additional local Aurora instances in each region for the customer information and purchases.

Key info: "LEAST amount of application changes", so not changing DB type or engine, no code refactoring! Right: C Wrong: -A: require code changes, Redshift makes no sense here as it is for data warehousing -B: require again code changes -D: would imply code changes as well.

I'll go with C

Its Option C cause, we only need a LEAST amount of changes.

It's C - all the others require application changes to accommodate a different DB, which is undesirable since the question is asking for minimal application changes. It's worth adding that in the real world things are often much more complicated than this, so you'd want to revisit the business requirements, validate them, forecast future requirements and make a decision. Having regions of US, Asia and Europe is a gross simplification, because what you really need to consider is the data protection regulations in specific jurisdictions, not continents. e.g. Indonesia is in Asia and up until Oct 2019 required customer data to be held in-country, but there is no AWS data centre there. What do you do?

Can't be B as it requires application changes. C is correct