Amazon AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate SAA-C03 Bundle

Configure a DLQ with inspected redrive policy would help if a message repeatedly fails and blocks successful work. Poison-message isolation prevents endless retries. That is not the symptom described here: an event source mapping cannot keep up with a high-volume stream. The matching response is Tune batching, concurrency and shard capacity within service constraints, because stream consumption throughput depends on worker and shard configuration.

For the alternative failure lambda receives asynchronous invocation errors but no failure destination is configured, the control Configure a supported Lambda on-failure destination or DLQ is relevant: failure destinations preserve records for later handling. Here the evidence instead is an event source mapping cannot keep up with a high-volume stream. The selected technical mechanism is Tune batching, concurrency and shard capacity within service constraints: stream consumption throughput depends on worker and shard configuration.

Store jobs in SQS and retry consumers when service resumes solves a different operational problem where a Lambda worker is unavailable for minutes while jobs arrive. A durable queue buffers failures independently from producers. It does not directly address an event source mapping cannot keep up with a high-volume stream. The case calls for Tune batching, concurrency and shard capacity within service constraints, since stream consumption throughput depends on worker and shard configuration.

Send read traffic through the Aurora reader endpoint would help if read-only analytics unexpectedly hit the writer and reduce transactional throughput. The reader endpoint balances eligible replica connections. That is not the symptom described here: an Aurora cluster has only one writer with no suitable replica and failover is slow. The matching response is Add Aurora Replicas in multiple AZs and configure failover priority, because aurora replicas can be promoted during writer failover.

For the alternative failure a business requires cross-Region disaster recovery from Aurora regional failure, the control Evaluate Aurora Global Database and regional recovery operations is relevant: global Database provides low-latency cross-region replication. Here the evidence instead is an Aurora cluster has only one writer with no suitable replica and failover is slow. The selected technical mechanism is Add Aurora Replicas in multiple AZs and configure failover priority: aurora replicas can be promoted during writer failover.

The competing option Use backup/PITR rather than assuming replicas undo committed changes would be useful when a damaged application issues logical deletes that replicate across all Aurora replicas. Replication propagates valid database operations including bad deletes. The present issue is an Aurora cluster has only one writer with no suitable replica and failover is slow; it is more directly addressed by Add Aurora Replicas in multiple AZs and configure failover priority. Aurora replicas can be promoted during writer failover.

For the alternative failure a Lambda fleet produces thousands of short-lived database connections, the control Use RDS Proxy for supported Aurora engines is relevant: rDS Proxy pools connections and smooths short application bursts. Here the evidence instead is read-only analytics unexpectedly hit the writer and reduce transactional throughput. The selected technical mechanism is Send read traffic through the Aurora reader endpoint: the reader endpoint balances eligible replica connections.

The competing option Evaluate Aurora Global Database and regional recovery operations would be useful when a business requires cross-Region disaster recovery from Aurora regional failure. Global Database provides low-latency cross-region replication. The present issue is read-only analytics unexpectedly hit the writer and reduce transactional throughput; it is more directly addressed by Send read traffic through the Aurora reader endpoint. The reader endpoint balances eligible replica connections.

The option Add Aurora Replicas in multiple AZs and configure failover priority addresses a separate condition: an Aurora cluster has only one writer with no suitable replica and failover is slow. Aurora replicas can be promoted during writer failover. The actual requirement is read-only analytics unexpectedly hit the writer and reduce transactional throughput. Recommended corrective action: Send read traffic through the Aurora reader endpoint. The reader endpoint balances eligible replica connections.

Add Aurora Replicas in multiple AZs and configure failover priority solves a different operational problem where an Aurora cluster has only one writer with no suitable replica and failover is slow. Aurora replicas can be promoted during writer failover. It does not directly address a Lambda fleet produces thousands of short-lived database connections. The case calls for Use RDS Proxy for supported Aurora engines, since rDS Proxy pools connections and smooths short application bursts.

The option Send read traffic through the Aurora reader endpoint addresses a separate condition: read-only analytics unexpectedly hit the writer and reduce transactional throughput. The reader endpoint balances eligible replica connections. The actual requirement is a Lambda fleet produces thousands of short-lived database connections. Recommended corrective action: Use RDS Proxy for supported Aurora engines. RDS Proxy pools connections and smooths short application bursts.

Evaluate Aurora Global Database and regional recovery operations would help if a business requires cross-Region disaster recovery from Aurora regional failure. Global Database provides low-latency cross-region replication. That is not the symptom described here: a Lambda fleet produces thousands of short-lived database connections. The matching response is Use RDS Proxy for supported Aurora engines, because rDS Proxy pools connections and smooths short application bursts.

The competing option Add Aurora Replicas in multiple AZs and configure failover priority would be useful when an Aurora cluster has only one writer with no suitable replica and failover is slow. Aurora replicas can be promoted during writer failover. The present issue is a business requires cross-Region disaster recovery from Aurora regional failure; it is more directly addressed by Evaluate Aurora Global Database and regional recovery operations. Global Database provides low-latency cross-region replication.

The option Send read traffic through the Aurora reader endpoint addresses a separate condition: read-only analytics unexpectedly hit the writer and reduce transactional throughput. The reader endpoint balances eligible replica connections. The actual requirement is a business requires cross-Region disaster recovery from Aurora regional failure. Recommended corrective action: Evaluate Aurora Global Database and regional recovery operations. Global Database provides low-latency cross-region replication.

For the alternative failure a Lambda fleet produces thousands of short-lived database connections, the control Use RDS Proxy for supported Aurora engines is relevant: rDS Proxy pools connections and smooths short application bursts. Here the evidence instead is a business requires cross-Region disaster recovery from Aurora regional failure. The selected technical mechanism is Evaluate Aurora Global Database and regional recovery operations: global Database provides low-latency cross-region replication.

The option Send read traffic through the Aurora reader endpoint addresses a separate condition: read-only analytics unexpectedly hit the writer and reduce transactional throughput. The reader endpoint balances eligible replica connections. The actual requirement is a damaged application issues logical deletes that replicate across all Aurora replicas. Recommended corrective action: Use backup/PITR rather than assuming replicas undo committed changes. Replication propagates valid database operations including bad deletes.

Evaluate Aurora Global Database and regional recovery operations would help if a business requires cross-Region disaster recovery from Aurora regional failure. Global Database provides low-latency cross-region replication. That is not the symptom described here: a damaged application issues logical deletes that replicate across all Aurora replicas. The matching response is Use backup/PITR rather than assuming replicas undo committed changes, because replication propagates valid database operations including bad deletes.

For the alternative failure an Aurora cluster has only one writer with no suitable replica and failover is slow, the control Add Aurora Replicas in multiple AZs and configure failover priority is relevant: aurora replicas can be promoted during writer failover. Here the evidence instead is a damaged application issues logical deletes that replicate across all Aurora replicas. The selected technical mechanism is Use backup/PITR rather than assuming replicas undo committed changes: replication propagates valid database operations including bad deletes.

Use ECS service subnets across AZs and suitable task distribution would help if a service requires placement across distinct Availability Zones. Multi-AZ tasks survive a single-zone failure. That is not the symptom described here: a new ECS task version fails health checks and all previous tasks have been stopped. The matching response is Configure ECS deployment circuit breaker/rollback and minimum healthy percent, because deployment rollback prevents a bad revision from wiping healthy capacity.

Store durable data in S3 or EFS instead of task ephemeral filesystem solves a different operational problem where a persistent file uploaded to a container vanishes after task replacement. Task storage is not durable across replacement. It does not directly address a new ECS task version fails health checks and all previous tasks have been stopped. The case calls for Configure ECS deployment circuit breaker/rollback and minimum healthy percent, since deployment rollback prevents a bad revision from wiping healthy capacity.

The competing option Configure deregistration delay and graceful termination would be useful when a container remains routable while it is shutting down. Connection draining reduces dropped in-flight requests. The present issue is a new ECS task version fails health checks and all previous tasks have been stopped; it is more directly addressed by Configure ECS deployment circuit breaker/rollback and minimum healthy percent. Deployment rollback prevents a bad revision from wiping healthy capacity.

Use ECS service scheduling and health-based replacement solves a different operational problem where a critical ECS service needs to restore a specified desired task count after one task crashes. Service scheduler maintains healthy desired state. It does not directly address a service requires placement across distinct Availability Zones. The case calls for Use ECS service subnets across AZs and suitable task distribution, since multi-AZ tasks survive a single-zone failure.

The competing option Configure ECS deployment circuit breaker/rollback and minimum healthy percent would be useful when a new ECS task version fails health checks and all previous tasks have been stopped. Deployment rollback prevents a bad revision from wiping healthy capacity. The present issue is a service requires placement across distinct Availability Zones; it is more directly addressed by Use ECS service subnets across AZs and suitable task distribution. Multi-AZ tasks survive a single-zone failure.

The option Store durable data in S3 or EFS instead of task ephemeral filesystem addresses a separate condition: a persistent file uploaded to a container vanishes after task replacement. Task storage is not durable across replacement. The actual requirement is a service requires placement across distinct Availability Zones. Recommended corrective action: Use ECS service subnets across AZs and suitable task distribution. Multi-AZ tasks survive a single-zone failure.

Use ECS service subnets across AZs and suitable task distribution solves a different operational problem where a service requires placement across distinct Availability Zones. Multi-AZ tasks survive a single-zone failure. It does not directly address a container remains routable while it is shutting down. The case calls for Configure deregistration delay and graceful termination, since connection draining reduces dropped in-flight requests.

The option Configure ECS deployment circuit breaker/rollback and minimum healthy percent addresses a separate condition: a new ECS task version fails health checks and all previous tasks have been stopped. Deployment rollback prevents a bad revision from wiping healthy capacity. The actual requirement is a container remains routable while it is shutting down. Recommended corrective action: Configure deregistration delay and graceful termination. Connection draining reduces dropped in-flight requests.

Store durable data in S3 or EFS instead of task ephemeral filesystem would help if a persistent file uploaded to a container vanishes after task replacement. Task storage is not durable across replacement. That is not the symptom described here: a container remains routable while it is shutting down. The matching response is Configure deregistration delay and graceful termination, because connection draining reduces dropped in-flight requests.

The competing option Configure deregistration delay and graceful termination would be useful when a container remains routable while it is shutting down. Connection draining reduces dropped in-flight requests. The present issue is a critical ECS service needs to restore a specified desired task count after one task crashes; it is more directly addressed by Use ECS service scheduling and health-based replacement. Service scheduler maintains healthy desired state.

The option Configure ECS deployment circuit breaker/rollback and minimum healthy percent addresses a separate condition: a new ECS task version fails health checks and all previous tasks have been stopped. Deployment rollback prevents a bad revision from wiping healthy capacity. The actual requirement is a critical ECS service needs to restore a specified desired task count after one task crashes. Recommended corrective action: Use ECS service scheduling and health-based replacement. Service scheduler maintains healthy desired state.

Use ECS service subnets across AZs and suitable task distribution would help if a service requires placement across distinct Availability Zones. Multi-AZ tasks survive a single-zone failure. That is not the symptom described here: a critical ECS service needs to restore a specified desired task count after one task crashes. The matching response is Use ECS service scheduling and health-based replacement, because service scheduler maintains healthy desired state.

The option Use ECS service subnets across AZs and suitable task distribution addresses a separate condition: a service requires placement across distinct Availability Zones. Multi-AZ tasks survive a single-zone failure. The actual requirement is a persistent file uploaded to a container vanishes after task replacement. Recommended corrective action: Store durable data in S3 or EFS instead of task ephemeral filesystem. Task storage is not durable across replacement.

For the alternative failure a new ECS task version fails health checks and all previous tasks have been stopped, the control Configure ECS deployment circuit breaker/rollback and minimum healthy percent is relevant: deployment rollback prevents a bad revision from wiping healthy capacity. Here the evidence instead is a persistent file uploaded to a container vanishes after task replacement. The selected technical mechanism is Store durable data in S3 or EFS instead of task ephemeral filesystem: task storage is not durable across replacement.

Configure deregistration delay and graceful termination solves a different operational problem where a container remains routable while it is shutting down. Connection draining reduces dropped in-flight requests. It does not directly address a persistent file uploaded to a container vanishes after task replacement. The case calls for Store durable data in S3 or EFS instead of task ephemeral filesystem, since task storage is not durable across replacement.