A serverless order-ingestion API writes directly to a database. During traffic spikes, the database occasionally throttles, Lambda retries create duplicate order records, and some requests time out. Which two changes best improve buffering and safe retry behavior? Select two.

Increase the Lambda timeout and keep writing directly to the database.

A longer timeout may hide transient failures, but it does not add buffering or prevent duplicate writes.

Replace SQS with SNS so every request is delivered immediately to all subscribers.

SNS fanout is useful for notifications, but it does not provide durable work queue buffering for a throttled consumer.

Disable retries so failed writes are never duplicated.

Disabling retries reduces duplicates, but it also turns transient failures into permanent lost orders.

What does this SAA-C03 question test?

Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: Put an Amazon SQS queue between the API and the database-processing function. — An SQS queue absorbs traffic spikes and decouples request intake from database processing, which prevents the application from failing simply because the database is temporarily throttled. Idempotent writes are equally important because SQS and Lambda can deliver messages more than once and retries can occur after partial failures. Together, these changes let the system retry safely while keeping order processing correct. Why others are wrong: Increasing the timeout does not address backlog or duplicate processing. SNS is a publish/subscribe service, not a durable work queue for this use case. Disabling retries may reduce duplicate attempts, but it also sacrifices availability and can lose legitimate orders during transient errors.

What should I do if I get this SAA-C03 question wrong?

Then try more questions from the same exam bank and focus on understanding why the wrong options are tempting.