SAP-C02 Practice Question: Accelerate Workload Migration and Modernization
A company is modernizing its application by breaking a monolith into microservices on Amazon EKS. The application uses a shared PostgreSQL database. The company wants to implement a database-per-service pattern. The migration must be done with zero downtime. Which approach should the company use?
⚠ Common exam trap
SAP-C02 often tests the misconception that DMS or read replicas alone can achieve database-per-service zero-downtime migration, when an incremental strangler fig approach is required.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Implement the strangler fig pattern: gradually migrate functionality and data to new services.
The strangler fig pattern incrementally extracts functionality from the monolith into new microservices, each with its own database, while keeping the monolith running. This allows zero-downtime migration because traffic is gradually shifted, and data can be migrated in phases with dual-write or CDC synchronization. It is the standard approach for decomposing a monolith into a database-per-service architecture without downtime.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Implement the strangler fig pattern: gradually migrate functionality and data to new services.
Why this is correct
The strangler fig pattern incrementally routes functionality and its data to new microservices while the monolith keeps serving, avoiding a big-bang cutover. This gradual, reversible migration is what achieves zero downtime with a shared PostgreSQL database.
- ✗
Use AWS DMS with CDC to replicate the shared database to multiple target databases.
Why it's wrong here
DMS with CDC replicates data between databases but does not decompose a shared schema into service-owned boundaries, so foreign keys and cross-service joins persist. It suits homogeneous migrations or ongoing replication into a consolidated target, not the database-per-service split this scenario requires.
- ✗
Use Amazon RDS read replicas to create separate databases for each service.
Why it's wrong here
Read replicas are read-only copies of the same schema, so they cannot host divergent per-service schemas or accept writes. Read replicas are tempting for offloading read traffic from a primary, but database-per-service requires independent writable databases, which replication alone does not provide.
- ✗
Create new databases for each service, migrate data during a maintenance window.
Why it's wrong here
A maintenance window introduces planned downtime, directly violating the zero-downtime requirement. It is tempting because scheduled cutovers are the traditional, low-risk way to move data, but the stem explicitly forbids any outage, so continuous replication with a live cutover is needed instead.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 984 original SAP-C02 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official Amazon Web Services exam blueprint
This SAP-C02 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Amazon Web Services certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the SAP-C02 exam.