mcAfee Secure Website
23

Amazon AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Bundle

Exam Code: AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02

Exam Name AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02

Certification Provider: Amazon

Corresponding Certification: AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional

AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Training Materials $23.86

Reliable & Actual Study Materials for AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Exam Success

The Latest AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Exam Questions as Experienced in the Actual Test!

  • 24
    Questions & Answers

    AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Questions & Answers

    515 Questions & Answers

    Includes questions types found on actual exam such as drag and drop, simulation, type in, and fill in the blank.

  • 25
    AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Video Course

    AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Training Course

    192 Video Lectures

    Based on Real Life Scenarios which you will encounter in exam and learn by working with real equipment.

  • exam =30
    Study Guide

    AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Study Guide

    1066 PDF Pages

    Study Guide developed by industry experts who have written exams in the past. They are technology-specific IT certification researchers with at least a decade of experience at Fortune 500 companies.

exam =32

AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Practice Tests

Guarantee

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Pass4sure has a remarkable Amazon Candidate Success record. We're confident of our products and provide no hassle product exchange. That's how confident we are!

99.3% Pass Rate
Total Cost: $184.97
Bundle Price: $161.11

Purchase Individually

  • exam =34
    Questions & Answers

    Questions & Answers

    515 Questions

    $124.99
    exam =35
  • exam =37
    AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Video Course

    Training Course

    192 Video Lectures

    $29.99
  • exam =36
    Study Guide

    Study Guide

    1066 PDF Pages

    $29.99

Amazon AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 Practice Test 47

Question 460

During an architecture migration cutover planning meeting, the decisive constraint is: A migration requires a managed web deployment environment for a supported platform with minimal infrastructure scripting. Which technical choice resolves the stated issue?

  1. Migrate eligible tasks to ECS with Fargate launch type
  2. Keep it on managed EC2 instances until those OS dependencies can be removed
  3. Choose Elastic Beanstalk and test the application's platform compatibility
  4. Move the handler to Lambda after validating runtime and request constraints

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Choose Elastic Beanstalk and test the application's platform compatibility. Beanstalk handles environment orchestration while preserving a conventional web app deployment model.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This alternative, Migrate eligible tasks to ECS with Fargate launch type, is appropriate when A containerized API already has an ECS task definition and team wants to stop managing node instances. Fargate removes host provisioning while retaining ECS task and service concepts.

B:

For the separate situation A legacy application has a tightly coupled OS service and requires privileged host-level changes, Keep it on managed EC2 instances until those OS dependencies can be removed could be useful. EC2 retains operating-system control unavailable in fully managed serverless services.

D:

Although Move the handler to Lambda after validating runtime and request constraints can be valid when A migrated HTTP handler is stateless, runs for seconds and has unpredictable demand, it targets a different technical condition. Lambda handles short on-demand work without persistent server capacity.

Question 461

In a production architecture assessment, the decisive constraint is: A microservice estate already depends on upstream Kubernetes APIs and operators. Which architecture decision most directly satisfies the requirement?

  1. Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role
  2. Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support
  3. Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services
  4. Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support. The choice follows from the service boundary and operational constraint stated in the scenario.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role solves the related scenario A Kubernetes workload needs access to one S3 bucket but should not inherit node IAM permissions; workload-specific IAM identities avoid excessive shared node access.

C:

Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services would address a different requirement: A small team wants managed compute for ECS containers with no EC2 instance fleet. Fargate runs compatible containers without customer-maintained worker hosts.

D:

This alternative, Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest, is appropriate when A container service must deploy the exact version tested in staging and avoid tag drift. Immutable image references preserve application provenance across deployment stages.

Question 462

A cloud platform team must address a specific requirement, the decisive constraint is: A service uses Docker images but has no Kubernetes-specific requirements and prioritizes AWS-native simplicity. What is the most appropriate design under these constraints?

  1. Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support
  2. Run it on Amazon ECS with suitable EC2 or Fargate capacity
  3. Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services
  4. Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Run it on Amazon ECS with suitable EC2 or Fargate capacity. ECS provides managed container orchestration without Kubernetes control-plane complexity.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Although Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support can be valid when A microservice estate already depends on upstream Kubernetes APIs and operators, it targets a different technical condition. EKS retains Kubernetes compatibility while AWS operates the control plane.

C:

This alternative, Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services, is appropriate when A small team wants managed compute for ECS containers with no EC2 instance fleet. Fargate runs compatible containers without customer-maintained worker hosts.

D:

For the separate situation A container service must deploy the exact version tested in staging and avoid tag drift, Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest could be useful. Immutable image references preserve application provenance across deployment stages.

Question 463

While investigating a cross-account AWS design, the decisive constraint is: A small team wants managed compute for ECS containers with no EC2 instance fleet. Which recommendation best addresses the actual bottleneck?

  1. Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services
  2. Run it on Amazon ECS with suitable EC2 or Fargate capacity
  3. Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role
  4. Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services. Fargate runs compatible containers without customer-maintained worker hosts.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This alternative, Run it on Amazon ECS with suitable EC2 or Fargate capacity, is appropriate when A service uses Docker images but has no Kubernetes-specific requirements and prioritizes AWS-native simplicity. ECS provides managed container orchestration without Kubernetes control-plane complexity.

C:

For the separate situation A Kubernetes workload needs access to one S3 bucket but should not inherit node IAM permissions, Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role could be useful. Workload-specific IAM identities avoid excessive shared node access.

D:

Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support solves the related scenario A microservice estate already depends on upstream Kubernetes APIs and operators; eKS retains Kubernetes compatibility while AWS operates the control plane.

Question 464

During a regulated workload modernization proposal, the decisive constraint is: A container service must deploy the exact version tested in staging and avoid tag drift. Which approach meets the stated objective with the least unnecessary complexity?

  1. Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role
  2. Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support
  3. Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest
  4. Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest. Immutable image references preserve application provenance across deployment stages.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This alternative, Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role, is appropriate when A Kubernetes workload needs access to one S3 bucket but should not inherit node IAM permissions. Workload-specific IAM identities avoid excessive shared node access.

B:

For the separate situation A microservice estate already depends on upstream Kubernetes APIs and operators, Use Amazon EKS for managed Kubernetes control-plane support could be useful. EKS retains Kubernetes compatibility while AWS operates the control plane.

D:

Although Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services can be valid when A small team wants managed compute for ECS containers with no EC2 instance fleet, it targets a different technical condition. Fargate runs compatible containers without customer-maintained worker hosts.

Question 465

A principal solutions architect reviews an AWS application dependency, the decisive constraint is: A Kubernetes workload needs access to one S3 bucket but should not inherit node IAM permissions. What should the architect implement?

  1. Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role
  2. Run it on Amazon ECS with suitable EC2 or Fargate capacity
  3. Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services
  4. Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Bind the workload service account to an appropriately scoped EKS Pod Identity role. Workload-specific IAM identities avoid excessive shared node access.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Run it on Amazon ECS with suitable EC2 or Fargate capacity solves the related scenario A service uses Docker images but has no Kubernetes-specific requirements and prioritizes AWS-native simplicity; eCS provides managed container orchestration without Kubernetes control-plane complexity.

C:

Although Select AWS Fargate capacity for eligible ECS services can be valid when A small team wants managed compute for ECS containers with no EC2 instance fleet, it targets a different technical condition. Fargate runs compatible containers without customer-maintained worker hosts.

D:

Pin its task or Pod image reference to an immutable ECR digest would address a different requirement: A container service must deploy the exact version tested in staging and avoid tag drift. Immutable image references preserve application provenance across deployment stages.

Question 466

An engineering organization has identified this operational requirement, the decisive constraint is: A migrated Windows file server must preserve SMB paths and Active Directory access semantics. What is the most defensible implementation decision?

  1. Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration
  2. Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization
  3. Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs
  4. Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration. The choice follows from the service boundary and operational constraint stated in the scenario.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization would address a different requirement: A migrated Linux application requires a shared POSIX file system mounted concurrently by hundreds of workers. EFS presents managed shared NFS rather than isolated host block volumes.

C:

This alternative, Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs, is appropriate when An object library containing product photos is accessed through HTTP URLs and has no filesystem mount requirement. S3 separates object persistence from host-attached file systems.

D:

For the separate situation An HPC migration requires parallel shared high-throughput files for simulation output, Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability could be useful. Lustre supports parallel compute access patterns that generic file shares may not satisfy.

Question 467

A production readiness review reports the following problem, the decisive constraint is: A migrated Linux application requires a shared POSIX file system mounted concurrently by hundreds of workers. Which architecture decision most directly satisfies the requirement?

  1. Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs
  2. Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability
  3. Attach appropriately sized EBS SSD volumes and test IOPS and throughput
  4. Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization. EFS presents managed shared NFS rather than isolated host block volumes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs would address a different requirement: An object library containing product photos is accessed through HTTP URLs and has no filesystem mount requirement. S3 separates object persistence from host-attached file systems.

B:

This alternative, Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability, is appropriate when An HPC migration requires parallel shared high-throughput files for simulation output. Lustre supports parallel compute access patterns that generic file shares may not satisfy.

C:

For the separate situation A transactional database on EC2 needs low-latency persistent block storage, Attach appropriately sized EBS SSD volumes and test IOPS and throughput could be useful. EBS provides persistent EC2 block devices suited to database files.

Question 468

An AWS Well-Architected design review identifies a condition, the decisive constraint is: A transactional database on EC2 needs low-latency persistent block storage. What is the most appropriate design under these constraints?

  1. Attach appropriately sized EBS SSD volumes and test IOPS and throughput
  2. Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs
  3. Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration
  4. Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Attach appropriately sized EBS SSD volumes and test IOPS and throughput. EBS provides persistent EC2 block devices suited to database files.

Incorrect Answers

B:

For the separate situation An object library containing product photos is accessed through HTTP URLs and has no filesystem mount requirement, Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs could be useful. S3 separates object persistence from host-attached file systems.

C:

Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration solves the related scenario A migrated Windows file server must preserve SMB paths and Active Directory access semantics; fSx for Windows supports SMB and Windows ACL expectations.

D:

Although Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization can be valid when A migrated Linux application requires a shared POSIX file system mounted concurrently by hundreds of workers, it targets a different technical condition. EFS presents managed shared NFS rather than isolated host block volumes.

Question 469

During an architecture migration cutover planning meeting, the decisive constraint is: An object library containing product photos is accessed through HTTP URLs and has no filesystem mount requirement. Which recommendation best addresses the actual bottleneck?

  1. Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs
  2. Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration
  3. Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization
  4. Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs. S3 separates object persistence from host-attached file systems.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration solves the related scenario A migrated Windows file server must preserve SMB paths and Active Directory access semantics; fSx for Windows supports SMB and Windows ACL expectations.

C:

Although Select EFS with supported access points and POSIX authorization can be valid when A migrated Linux application requires a shared POSIX file system mounted concurrently by hundreds of workers, it targets a different technical condition. EFS presents managed shared NFS rather than isolated host block volumes.

D:

Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability would address a different requirement: An HPC migration requires parallel shared high-throughput files for simulation output. Lustre supports parallel compute access patterns that generic file shares may not satisfy.

Question 470

A team is choosing AWS services for a specific workload, the decisive constraint is: An HPC migration requires parallel shared high-throughput files for simulation output. Which approach meets the stated objective with the least unnecessary complexity?

  1. Attach appropriately sized EBS SSD volumes and test IOPS and throughput
  2. Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs
  3. Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration
  4. Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Use FSx for Lustre with a deployment mode aligned to throughput and durability. Lustre supports parallel compute access patterns that generic file shares may not satisfy.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Attach appropriately sized EBS SSD volumes and test IOPS and throughput solves the related scenario A transactional database on EC2 needs low-latency persistent block storage; eBS provides persistent EC2 block devices suited to database files.

B:

Although Move the photos to S3 object storage and expose them through application or CDN URLs can be valid when An object library containing product photos is accessed through HTTP URLs and has no filesystem mount requirement, it targets a different technical condition. S3 separates object persistence from host-attached file systems.

C:

Migrate shares to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with compatible directory configuration would address a different requirement: A migrated Windows file server must preserve SMB paths and Active Directory access semantics. FSx for Windows supports SMB and Windows ACL expectations.