A company wants to store data from thousands of IoT devices with varying data rates. The data must be stored in a schema-on-read fashion and support SQL queries. Which AWS service should be used?
S3's schema-on-read storage decouples ingestion from structure, letting thousands of IoT devices write at varying rates without transformation. Athena then queries that data in place using standard SQL, satisfying both the schema-on-read and SQL query constraints without managing servers or loading into a warehouse.
Why this answer
Exam trap
The trap here is that candidates confuse schema-on-read with schema-on-write, assuming DynamoDB's flexible schema or Redshift's SQL support fits, but they miss that DynamoDB lacks native SQL and Redshift requires upfront table definitions, while Athena directly queries raw files in S3 with SQL.
How to eliminate wrong answers
Option A is wrong because Amazon RDS for MySQL requires a fixed schema defined before writing data, which contradicts the schema-on-read requirement and cannot handle the high write throughput of thousands of IoT devices without scaling limitations. Option C is wrong because Amazon DynamoDB is a NoSQL key-value and document database that does not support SQL queries natively (it uses PartiQL with limited SQL compatibility) and is not designed for schema-on-read. Option D is wrong because Amazon Redshift is a columnar data warehouse that requires schema-on-write (tables must be defined before loading data) and is optimized for structured, batch-loaded analytics rather than streaming IoT ingestion with varying data rates.