hardmultiple choiceObjective-mapped

Exhibit

ALB and ASG snapshot (15-minute peak):
- RequestCountPerTarget: 1,920
- TargetResponseTime p95: 2.9 seconds
- HTTPCode_Target_5XX_Count: 0
EC2 application metrics from CloudWatch agent:
- CPUUtilization: 33%
- MemoryUtilization: 46%
- NetworkIn/Out: steady
Application logs:
[WARN] worker queue depth reached 5,000
[INFO] rejecting requests after thread pool saturation
Current Auto Scaling policy:
- Target tracking on CPUUtilization = 55%

Based on the exhibit, which change best reduces latency during peak traffic without overprovisioning the fleet?

Question 1hardmultiple choice
Full question →

Based on the exhibit, which change best reduces latency during peak traffic without overprovisioning the fleet?

Answer choices

Why each option matters

Good practice is not just finding the correct option. The wrong answers often show the exact trap the exam wants you to fall into.

A

Distractor review

Replace the instances with a larger instance family so each server has more headroom.

Bigger instances can help only when compute saturation is the main bottleneck, but the exhibit points to queue buildup and request concurrency.

B

Best answer

Change the Auto Scaling policy to target tracking on ALB RequestCountPerTarget.

RequestCountPerTarget matches the actual demand reaching each instance and scales capacity before the thread pool saturates. Because CPU is still low, CPU-based scaling would react too late or not at all. Target tracking on request count helps keep queue depth and latency down while avoiding unnecessary overprovisioning during quieter periods.

C

Distractor review

Use scheduled scaling to add instances only during the business hours peak window.

Scheduled scaling follows the clock, not live demand, so it cannot react well to sudden surges or shifting traffic patterns.

D

Distractor review

Replace the ALB with a Network Load Balancer to reduce request latency.

A Network Load Balancer changes the front end, but the logs show application thread exhaustion rather than load balancer overhead.

Common exam trap

Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword

Many certification questions include familiar terms but test a specific constraint. Read the exact wording before choosing an answer that is generally true but wrong for this case.

Technical deep dive

How to think about this question

This question should be treated as a scenario, not a definition check. Identify the problem, the constraint and the best action. Then compare each option against those facts.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
  • Find the constraint that changes the correct option.
  • Eliminate answers that are true in general but not in this case.
  • Use explanations to understand the rule behind the answer.

TExam Day Tips

  • Underline the problem statement mentally.
  • Watch for words such as best, first, most likely and least administrative effort.
  • Review why wrong options are wrong, not only why the correct option is correct.

Related practice questions

Related SAA-C03 practice-question pages

Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.

More questions from this exam

Keep practising from the same exam bank, or move into a focused topic page if this question exposed a weak area.

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

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: Change the Auto Scaling policy to target tracking on ALB RequestCountPerTarget. — The exhibit shows a classic application-tier concurrency bottleneck: the queue grows, threads saturate, and latency rises even though CPU remains modest. That means scaling on CPU is the wrong signal. A target tracking policy based on ALB RequestCountPerTarget uses incoming demand as the scaling metric, which is a better fit for request-driven web tiers. It adds capacity as traffic per instance rises, reducing queue buildup without permanently running too many instances. Why others are wrong: Bigger instances may not solve a request-queue bottleneck if concurrency, not raw compute, is the limiter. Scheduled scaling is too rigid and can miss unexpected spikes or dips. Replacing the ALB does not address the evidence of application saturation, and a Network Load Balancer would not fix the back-end thread pool pressure shown in the logs.

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.

Discussion

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.