SAP-C02 Continuous Improvement for Existing Solutions Practice Question
A company runs a web application on a single EC2 instance. They want to improve availability and fault tolerance with minimal architectural changes. What should they do?
⚠ Common exam trap
SAP-C02 often tests the misconception that adding more resources to a single instance (like multiple EBS volumes or a larger instance type) improves availability, when in fact true fault tolerance requires distributing the workload across multiple Availability Zones.
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
✓
Use an Auto Scaling group with a minimum of two instances across two Availability Zones.
Using an Auto Scaling group with a minimum of two instances across two Availability Zones provides high availability and fault tolerance by distributing the application across multiple physically separate data centers. If one Availability Zone fails, the other instance continues to serve traffic, and the Auto Scaling group can automatically replace failed instances. This approach requires minimal architectural changes—just moving from a single instance to an Auto Scaling group—and directly addresses the requirements.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Attach multiple EBS volumes to the instance.
Why it's wrong here
Multiple EBS volumes attach to one instance, so the instance remains a single point of failure; availability requires a second instance behind a load balancer or Auto Scaling group. EBS volumes suit capacity and snapshot needs, not fault tolerance, making this tempting when storage is confused with redundancy.
- ✓
Use an Auto Scaling group with a minimum of two instances across two Availability Zones.
Why this is correct
An Auto Scaling group spanning two Availability Zones replaces the single instance with redundant capacity, so an AZ failure no longer takes the application down. This satisfies the fault-tolerance requirement while keeping the same instance-based architecture, avoiding a redesign.
- ✗
Create multiple subnets in the same Availability Zone.
Why it's wrong here
Multiple subnets within one Availability Zone share that zone's fate, so an AZ outage still takes down the instance. It is tempting because subnetting is a small change and does improve network segmentation, which is the correct aim when isolation, not fault tolerance, is required.
- ✗
Upgrade to a larger instance type.
Why it's wrong here
Resizing the instance changes capacity, not topology; a single instance in one Availability Zone remains a single point of failure. It is tempting because vertical scaling is a minimal change, and it is correct when the goal is performance rather than availability.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This SAP-C02 question is part of Courseiva's 984-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. 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.