Exam DP-200 topic 2 question 42 discussion

Actual exam question from Microsoft's DP-200

Question #: 42
Topic #: 2

HOTSPOT -
You have a self-hosted integration runtime in Azure Data Factory.
The current status of the integration runtime has the following configurations:
✑ Status: Running
✑ Type: Self-Hosted
✑ Version: 4.4.7292.1
✑ Running / Registered Node(s): 1/1
✑ High Availability Enabled: False
✑ Linked Count: 0
✑ Queue Length: 0
✑ Average Queue Duration: 0.00s
The integration runtime has the following node details:
✑ Name: X-M
✑ Status: Running
✑ Version: 4.4.7292.1
✑ Available Memory: 7697MB
✑ CPU Utilization: 6%
✑ Network (In/Out): 1.21KBps/0.83KBps
✑ Concurrent Jobs (Running/Limit): 2/14
✑ Role: Dispatcher/Worker
✑ Credential Status: In Sync
Use the drop-down menus to select the answer choice that completes each statement based on the information presented.
NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
Hot Area:

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer:

Box 1: fail until the node comes back online
We see: High Availability Enabled: False
Note: Higher availability of the self-hosted integration runtime so that it's no longer the single point of failure in your big data solution or cloud data integration with
Data Factory.

Box 2: lowered -
We see:
Concurrent Jobs (Running/Limit): 2/14
CPU Utilization: 6%
Note: When the processor and available RAM aren't well utilized, but the execution of concurrent jobs reaches a node's limits, scale up by increasing the number of concurrent jobs that a node can run
Reference:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/data-factory/create-self-hosted-integration-runtime

by dangal95 at May 4, 2021, 9:36 p.m.

Comments

Submit Cancel

MMM777

Highly Voted 4 years, 1 month ago

If each job is similar and each uses 3% CPU - then even at current max 14,only 42% CPU utilization. Should INCREASE the limit - which is what the answer is also saying.

upvoted 12 times

111222333

4 years ago

Agree with "raise". If we lower the number of concurrent jobs, the CPU will become even more *under*utilized. Because then when it reaches the limit number of concurrent jobs, it will occupy even less CPU -> CPU will never be optimally utilized. RAISE the number of concurrent jobs so that their CPU consumption comes closer to CPU's max. Reference: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/data-factory/create-self-hosted-integration-runtime#scale-up

upvoted 1 times

...

michalS

3 years, 9 months ago

You are not increasing currently running jobs, but the limit of jobs that can run concurrently, which is 14 at the moment. So increasing it would only reduce cpu utilization.

upvoted 1 times

...

Simon2021

Most Recent 3 years, 11 months ago

It should lower the concurrent Jobs limit.

upvoted 1 times

...

Pierwiastek

3 years, 11 months ago

I agree with the answer. We should lower Concurrent Jobs (Running/Limit) value. It means we should lower the limit value. We don't need so big value if we use only 2 of 14.

upvoted 2 times

...

dangal95

4 years, 1 month ago

Shouldn't the second option be "left as is" since the number of concurrent jobs is 2/14? The answer states that if the number of concurrent jobs reaches the limit (14 in this case) and the CPU is under utilized then we should increase the number of concurrent jobs that can run. In this case it seems that 6% is a good amount of utilization given that 2/14 jobs (14%) are running, no?

upvoted 3 times

cadio30

4 years ago

"When the processor and available RAM aren't well utilized, but the execution of concurrent jobs reaches a node's limits, scale up by increasing the number of concurrent jobs that a node can run. You might also want to scale up when activities time out because the self-hosted IR is overloaded. As shown in the following image, you can increase the maximum capacity for a node." The above statement was quoted from the link provided below and on this scenario, it requires to increase the concurrent jobs (running/limit) Reference: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/data-factory/create-self-hosted-integration-runtime

upvoted 2 times

lgtiza

3 years, 11 months ago

I agree with Dangal, "left as is", because here you are not reaching a node's limits (it's just using 6%). It it was using the 14 jobs and it would be using 20% then I would say do raise the number of possible jobs, otherwise not. And also I would not lower the number of possible jobs because I don't know how many concurrent jobs I would need to run, this is just a "snapshot" of what was happening at that moment.

upvoted 1 times

...