Courseiva

CCNA Cost and Performance Optimization Questions

75 of 141 questions · Page 1/2 · Cost and Performance Optimization · Answers revealed

1
MCQmedium

An administrator runs the above CloudWatch command to analyze CPU utilization for an EC2 instance. The instance is currently running with a t3.large instance type. The company wants to optimize costs. Based on the data, which action should the administrator take?

A.Stop the instance to save costs immediately.
B.Downsize the instance to t3.medium to reduce costs.
C.Scale up the instance to t3.xlarge to improve performance.
D.Purchase a Reserved Instance for the current instance type.
AnswerB

CloudWatch shows low CPU utilization, indicating the t3.large (or current size) is over-provisioned for the actual workload. Downsizing to t3.medium, which has the same vCPU count but half the memory (4 GiB vs 8 GiB), will reduce the on-demand hourly cost while still providing adequate compute for the observed load. Before resizing, confirm memory, network throughput, and application performance remain above the 95th percentile to avoid an undersized instance.

Why this answer

The average CPU utilization over the week is low (around 15.5%), indicating the instance is over-provisioned. Downsizing to a t3.medium (half the vCPUs and memory) would likely be sufficient and reduce costs. Reserved Instances would be cost-effective only if the instance runs consistently, but the current utilization is low.

Scaling up would increase costs. Stopping the instance is not an option if needed.

2
MCQhard

A company uses a centralized logging solution with Amazon OpenSearch Service. The log volume has grown significantly, increasing costs. The logs are retained for 90 days for compliance, but only the last 30 days are frequently accessed. Which combination of actions would reduce costs without compromising compliance?

A.Move the logs to Amazon S3 Glacier and use a Lambda function to query them.
B.Increase the number of data nodes to improve indexing performance.
C.Migrate indices older than 30 days to UltraWarm nodes.
D.Configure an index lifecycle policy to delete indices older than 30 days.
AnswerC

UltraWarm nodes in Amazon OpenSearch Service provide a warm storage tier that is dramatically cheaper per GiB than hot storage but still fully searchable, because it uses a combination of Amazon S3 and a small caching layer. By creating an Index State Management (ISM) policy that moves indices older than 30 days to UltraWarm, the company retains the ability to query compliance-related logs without paying for high-performance EBS-backed hot nodes. This meets both the cost-reduction and the 90-day compliance/retention requirements, since the data remains accessible and the policy can later delete or transition it as needed.

Why this answer

Migrating indices older than 30 days to UltraWarm nodes reduces storage costs because UltraWarm provides cost-effective storage for infrequently accessed data. This retains data for the full 90-day compliance period while keeping the last 30 days in hot storage for fast access. Option A is incorrect because moving logs to S3 Glacier would make querying impractical and is not designed for OpenSearch.

Option B is incorrect because increasing data nodes would increase costs without addressing storage optimization. Option D is incorrect because deleting indices after 30 days would violate the 90-day retention requirement.

3
MCQeasy

An application runs on c5.xlarge EC2 instances 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in us-east-1. The workload is stable and will not change instance type for at least 12 months. The team wants to reduce compute costs by 30 to 40 percent compared to On-Demand pricing. Which purchasing option achieves this with the lowest financial risk?

A.Purchase a 1-year Standard Reserved Instance for c5.xlarge in us-east-1 with All Upfront or Partial Upfront payment
B.Use Spot Instances with an interruption tolerance of 5 minutes for the workload
C.Enable EC2 Auto Scaling with a target tracking policy to scale down to zero instances during off-peak hours
D.Purchase a 3-year Convertible Reserved Instance to maximize the discount percentage
AnswerA

A 1-year Standard RI matches the 12-month stability horizon and delivers 30–40 percent savings versus On-Demand. All Upfront provides the deepest discount; Partial Upfront reduces the upfront cash requirement with a slightly lower overall saving. The 1-year commitment limits risk compared to a 3-year commitment for an uncertain future period.

Why this answer

A 1-year Standard Reserved Instance (RI) with All Upfront or Partial Upfront payment offers a 30-40% discount over On-Demand pricing for a stable, always-on workload. This option provides the lowest financial risk because it commits to a fixed instance type and region for only one year, matching the workload's stable nature without the flexibility premium of Convertible RIs or the interruption risk of Spot Instances.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may choose the 3-year Convertible RI (Option D) for its higher discount percentage, overlooking the fact that the longer commitment and unnecessary flexibility introduce greater financial risk for a stable, unchanging workload.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because Spot Instances can be interrupted with as little as a 5-minute warning, which introduces significant financial and operational risk for a workload that must run 24/7 without interruption. Option C is wrong because scaling down to zero instances during off-peak hours would violate the requirement that the application runs 24/7, and it does not address the need to reduce costs for the always-on baseline. Option D is wrong because a 3-year Convertible Reserved Instance, while offering a higher discount percentage, introduces greater financial risk due to the longer commitment period and the unnecessary flexibility to change instance types, which the workload does not require.

4
MCQmedium

A company runs a fleet of EC2 instances in a production environment. The instances are part of an Auto Scaling group that uses a launch template with a m5.large instance type. The company's SysOps administrator notices that the instances are often over-provisioned, with average CPU utilization below 20% for the past month. The administrator wants to reduce costs without affecting application performance. The application is stateless and can handle temporary performance degradation. Which action should the administrator take?

A.Purchase Reserved Instances for the current m5.large instances to lower hourly cost.
B.Modify the launch template to use a t3.medium instance type.
C.Enable detailed monitoring on all instances to collect more data.
D.Increase the minimum size of the Auto Scaling group to reduce scale-out events.
AnswerB

Changing the launch template to t3.medium corrects the over-provisioning at the source: t3.medium provides the same 2 vCPU count but only 4 GiB of memory, halving the allocated RAM while remaining eligible for burstable CPU credits. For a workload with low average utilization and occasional spikes, t3 instances can burst using earned CPU credits, then settle back to a low baseline, making the smaller instance type adequate. This directly reduces the per-hour cost for every instance the Auto Scaling group launches, which is the most effective right-sizing action listed.

Why this answer

Modifying the launch template to use a t3.medium instance type is correct because t3 instances are burstable and cost-effective for workloads with low average CPU utilization (below 20%). The application is stateless and can handle temporary performance degradation, making burstable instances suitable. This reduces costs without affecting performance during normal operation, as t3.medium provides a baseline CPU with the ability to burst.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests cost optimization, and candidates may choose Reserved Instances thinking it reduces cost, but it only lowers the hourly rate for existing over-provisioned instances, not addressing the root cause of over-provisioning.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because purchasing Reserved Instances for over-provisioned m5.large instances locks in costs for underutilized resources, not reducing waste. Option C is wrong because enabling detailed monitoring only provides more granular metrics; it does not reduce costs. Option D is wrong because increasing the minimum size of the Auto Scaling group would increase the number of instances, raising costs further.

5
MCQmedium

A SysOps administrator notices that the monthly bill for Amazon S3 has increased significantly. The company uses S3 for storing application logs and user uploads. The logs are accessed rarely but must be retained for 3 years. User uploads are accessed frequently for the first 30 days, then rarely after. Which S3 lifecycle policy will optimize storage costs?

A.Transition logs to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days, and transition user uploads to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days, then to Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days.
B.Transition user uploads to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days, and transition logs to S3 Glacier after 90 days.
C.Move logs to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days, and delete user uploads after 1 year.
D.Transition logs to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days, and transition user uploads to S3 One Zone-IA after 30 days.
AnswerA

This is correct because logs are typically append-only and rarely accessed after the first 30 days, making S3 Glacier Deep Archive the lowest-cost storage class while satisfying the 3-year retention requirement. User uploads, however, are frequently accessed in the month after upload, so S3 Standard-IA after 30 days reduces cost without sacrificing retrieval performance; then transitioning to Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days aligns with the access drop-off and keeps lifecycle costs minimal.

Why this answer

The correct policy matches storage class to access patterns: logs are rarely accessed but retained for three years, so transitioning them to Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days minimizes cost for long-term archival. User uploads are frequently accessed for 30 days, then rarely, so moving them to Standard-IA after 30 days and then to Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days aligns cost with declining access frequency while preserving durability. This combination addresses both data types with the cheapest suitable tiers.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests whether candidates match access frequency and retention requirements to the correct storage class — the trap is choosing the cheapest tier for data that is still frequently accessed, or deleting data that must be retained.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because it moves user uploads to Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days even though they are accessed frequently during that period, and it delays log transition to 90 days, wasting cost on Standard storage for rarely accessed logs. Option C is wrong because deleting user uploads after one year violates the implied retention need and destroys data that may still be required. Option D is wrong because Standard-IA for logs is more expensive than Deep Archive for rarely accessed data, and One Zone-IA for user uploads sacrifices durability (single AZ) without addressing the long-term archival requirement.

6
MCQeasy

A company is using AWS Lambda functions to process events from Amazon S3. The functions are invoked several thousand times per minute. The SysOps administrator notices that the functions are taking longer to execute during peak times. Which action should the administrator take to improve performance?

A.Increase the Lambda function timeout.
B.Use a larger EC2 instance type for the Lambda functions.
C.Increase the memory allocation for the Lambda functions.
D.Enable provisioned concurrency on the Lambda functions.
AnswerC

Increasing the memory allocation is the correct approach because Lambda allocates a proportional amount of virtual CPU (vCPU) based on the configured memory value, up to the maximum allowed. More memory translates to more compute power, which directly speeds up CPU-bound and memory-intensive code, thereby reducing execution duration. For example, a function with 1,769 MB receives a full vCPU, while higher values receive more, so raising memory is effectively scaling up the function's processing capacity.

Why this answer

Increasing the memory allocation for a Lambda function also proportionally increases its CPU allocation, which can improve execution speed for compute-bound tasks, such as processing events from S3 during peak times. Option A is incorrect because increasing the timeout only allows the function to run longer, but does not make it faster. Option B is incorrect because Lambda abstracts the underlying infrastructure; you cannot choose EC2 instance types.

Option D is incorrect because provisioned concurrency reduces cold starts but does not affect the execution time of warm functions.

7
MCQmedium

A company has a web application running on EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer. The application experiences latency spikes during peak hours. Amazon CloudWatch metrics show that CPU and memory are not fully utilized. The SysOps administrator suspects the bottleneck is the database. The database is an RDS for MySQL instance. Which action should the administrator take to improve performance without over-provisioning?

A.Add a Read Replica to offload read queries.
B.Convert the RDS instance to a Multi-AZ deployment.
C.Enable RDS Performance Insights to analyze database load and identify slow queries.
D.Increase the RDS instance size to the next tier.
AnswerC

Enable RDS Performance Insights, which gives you a real-time and historical view of database load dimensioned by waits, SQL statements, and hosts. This is the correct first step because it lets you pinpoint whether the bottleneck is CPU, storage, lock waits, or an inefficient query pattern, rather than guessing. Only after identifying the specific load source should you consider changes like adding indexes, rewriting queries, or scaling the instance.

Why this answer

The administrator needs to diagnose the database bottleneck before making changes. RDS Performance Insights provides detailed visibility into database load, wait events, and top SQL statements, allowing identification of slow queries or resource contention. This aligns with the goal of improving performance without over-provisioning, as it enables targeted optimization rather than guessing at scaling.

The other options either add unnecessary resources or don't address the root cause.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the difference between diagnosing and resolving performance issues; candidates may jump to scaling or replication without first analyzing the database workload, leading to unnecessary costs or ineffective solutions.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because adding a Read Replica only helps if the bottleneck is read-heavy and the application can be configured to use it; it doesn't diagnose the issue and may not address the actual cause. Option B is wrong because Multi-AZ is for high availability and failover, not performance improvement; it doesn't reduce load on the primary. Option D is wrong because increasing instance size is over-provisioning and may not fix the bottleneck if it's due to inefficient queries or locking.

8
MCQeasy

A company runs a batch processing job on Amazon EC2 instances that runs for 3 hours each night. The job can be interrupted and can resume from the last checkpoint without data loss. The SysOps administrator wants to minimize compute costs for this workload. Which Amazon EC2 purchasing option should be used?

A.On-Demand Instances
B.Reserved Instances
C.Spot Instances
D.Dedicated Hosts
AnswerC

Spot Instances give the company the largest possible EC2 discount, up to 90% off On-Demand, and are ideal for fault-tolerant, interruptible workloads like the described batch job. Because the job uses checkpointing, it can safely stop after a two-minute Spot interruption notice and later resume from the last saved state, so cost savings are maximized without sacrificing data integrity or job completion.

Why this answer

Spot Instances are correct because the batch job is fault-tolerant (can be interrupted and resume from checkpoints) and runs for a fixed 3-hour window nightly. Spot Instances offer significant cost savings (up to 90% off On-Demand) by using spare EC2 capacity, which can be reclaimed by AWS with a 2-minute interruption notice. Since the workload can handle interruptions gracefully, Spot Instances minimize compute costs while meeting the job's requirements.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may choose On-Demand or Reserved Instances because they assume a nightly 3-hour job requires guaranteed availability, overlooking that Spot Instances are ideal for fault-tolerant, interruptible workloads and offer the lowest cost.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because On-Demand Instances have no discount and would be the most expensive option for a predictable nightly workload. Option B is wrong because Reserved Instances require a 1- or 3-year commitment and are designed for steady-state workloads, not for a short 3-hour nightly job that can be interrupted; they would lock in costs without leveraging the fault tolerance of the job. Option D is wrong because Dedicated Hosts provide physical server isolation for licensing or compliance needs, which is unnecessary here and incurs additional costs without any benefit for a batch processing job.

9
MCQeasy

A company wants to receive alerts when their monthly AWS spending exceeds $1,000. Which AWS service should be used?

A.AWS Trusted Advisor
B.AWS CloudWatch
C.AWS Budgets
D.AWS Cost Explorer
AnswerC

AWS Budgets is the purpose-built service for tracking spending and usage against predefined cost thresholds, allowing you to create budgets for monthly, quarterly, or annual periods. You can set multiple alerts—both for actual spend and forecasted spend—with custom thresholds and notification preferences (email, SNS) or even Lambda triggers. This directly satisfies the requirement to receive alerts when the monthly AWS spend exceeds a specific amount, making AWS Budgets the correct answer.

Why this answer

AWS Budgets allows setting cost thresholds and alerts. CloudWatch alarms are for metrics, not budgets. Cost Explorer is for visualization.

Trusted Advisor provides recommendations.

10
MCQhard

A company runs a critical application on EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group behind an Application Load Balancer. The application requires very low latency and high availability. The SysOps administrator notices that the application experiences increased latency during traffic spikes even though the Auto Scaling group is scaling out. Which solution would MOST effectively reduce latency?

A.Change the launch configuration to use a larger instance type with more CPU and memory.
B.Pre-warm the load balancer by contacting AWS Support.
C.Increase the Auto Scaling cooldown period.
D.Deploy the instances in multiple Availability Zones.
AnswerA

Changing the launch configuration to a larger instance type (e.g., from t3.medium to t3.large) vertically scales each EC2 instance, providing more vCPUs and memory to process requests concurrently. This directly reduces per-request CPU queueing and memory pressure during traffic spikes, lowering latency. However, the launch configuration only applies to newly launched instances, so an instance refresh or replacement may be needed to realize the benefit on existing instances.

Why this answer

Using a larger instance type with more CPU and memory directly addresses the root cause of increased latency during traffic spikes: the existing instances are resource-constrained under load. By provisioning instances with higher compute capacity, each instance can handle more requests per second, reducing queueing delays and per-request processing time. This is a more immediate and effective solution than scaling out alone, which adds instances but does not improve the performance of each individual instance.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may assume scaling out (adding more instances) always reduces latency, but the question explicitly states that scaling is already occurring yet latency persists, indicating a per-instance performance bottleneck that only a larger instance type can resolve.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because pre-warming the load balancer is a manual process typically used for anticipated large traffic events (e.g., product launches) and does not address latency caused by under-provisioned instances; the ALB itself is not the bottleneck here. Option C is wrong because increasing the Auto Scaling cooldown period would actually slow down the scaling response, making latency worse during traffic spikes by delaying the addition of new instances. Option D is wrong because deploying instances in multiple Availability Zones improves fault tolerance and availability, but does not reduce per-instance latency under load; it may even increase cross-AZ data transfer costs without solving the resource contention issue.

11
MCQmedium

A company runs a web application on EC2 instances with Elastic Load Balancing. They notice that costs are higher than expected. What is the MOST cost-effective way to optimize costs while maintaining high availability?

A.Use Spot Instances for all traffic.
B.Use On-Demand instances for all traffic.
C.Use a combination of Reserved Instances for baseline traffic and On-Demand for spikes.
D.Reduce the number of instances to one.
AnswerC

This is the correct approach because Reserved Instances provide a significant hourly discount in exchange for a one- or three-year commitment, making them ideal for the steady, predictable baseline web traffic. On-Demand Instances, though more expensive, are billed per second with no commitment, so they are perfect for absorbing temporary spikes without over-provisioning or risking capacity loss. By covering the minimum long-term load with Reserved Instances and adding On-Demand Instances only when load increases, you minimize spend while maintaining availability and elasticity — the core goal of cost-aware architecture.

Why this answer

Reserved Instances provide a significant discount (up to ~72% versus On-Demand) in exchange for a one- or three-year commitment, making them ideal for the predictable baseline load. On-Demand instances then absorb traffic spikes without a long-term commitment, so the workload stays highly available while the blended cost is minimized. This hybrid model is the standard AWS cost-optimization pattern for steady-state web tiers behind an ELB.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing Spot Instances with a general cost-saving answer — candidates forget that Spot's interruption model makes it unsuitable when the question explicitly requires high availability.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Spot Instances can be reclaimed by AWS with only a two-minute interruption notice, so using them for all traffic would break the high-availability requirement. Option B is wrong because paying full On-Demand rates for the predictable baseline wastes the discount that Reserved Instances or Savings Plans would capture. Option D is wrong because collapsing to a single instance eliminates redundancy and creates a single point of failure, violating the high-availability requirement outright.

12
MCQeasy

A company runs a web application on Amazon EC2 instances that run 24/7. The application has a predictable and steady load. The SysOps administrator wants to minimize compute costs while ensuring the required capacity is always available. Which purchasing option should be used?

A.On-Demand Instances
B.Reserved Instances
C.Spot Instances
D.Dedicated Hosts
AnswerB

Reserved Instances are a billing discount that requires a 1- or 3-year commitment to a specific instance family, region, and operating system. In exchange for that commitment, you receive up to a 72% discount off the On-Demand hourly rate, depending on the payment option (All Upfront, Partial Upfront, or No Upfront). For an always-on web application with predictable compute needs, this significantly lowers the monthly cost, making Reserved Instances the most cost-effective choice among the available options.

Why this answer

Reserved Instances (RIs) are the correct choice because the workload runs 24/7 with a predictable and steady load. By committing to a 1- or 3-year term, the company can achieve a significant discount (up to 72%) compared to On-Demand pricing, while ensuring capacity is always available. This aligns with the goal of minimizing compute costs without sacrificing availability.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose On-Demand Instances for simplicity, overlooking that Reserved Instances provide substantial cost savings for predictable, always-on workloads without any risk of interruption.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because On-Demand Instances are billed per hour with no upfront commitment, making them more expensive for a steady 24/7 workload that could benefit from a reservation discount. Option C is wrong because Spot Instances can be interrupted with a 2-minute warning when AWS needs capacity back, making them unsuitable for a production web application that requires always-on availability. Option D is wrong because Dedicated Hosts provide physical server isolation for licensing or compliance needs, not cost savings for a standard web application, and they incur additional per-host charges.

13
MCQmedium

A company stores application logs in Amazon S3. The logs are rarely accessed after the first 30 days, but must be retained for 7 years for compliance. The SysOps administrator wants to minimize storage costs while ensuring logs are available for retrieval within 12 hours if needed. Which S3 lifecycle configuration is the most cost-effective?

A.S3 Standard for 30 days, then transition to S3 Glacier Deep Archive
B.S3 Standard for 30 days, then transition to S3 Glacier (Flexible Retrieval)
C.Use S3 Intelligent-Tiering from the start
D.S3 Standard for 30 days, then transition to S3 One Zone-IA
AnswerA

This is the most cost-effective lifecycle policy for logs that are frequently accessed for the first 30 days but rarely read afterward. A lifecycle rule can automatically transition objects to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days, where storage costs just $0.00099 per GB-month. Even though standard retrieval can take up to 12 hours, that is acceptable for compliance log analysis that is not time-sensitive.

Why this answer

It transitions logs from S3 Standard (for frequent access during the first 30 days) to S3 Glacier Deep Archive, which offers the lowest storage cost for long-term retention. Since logs must be retained for 7 years and only need retrieval within 12 hours, Glacier Deep Archive's 12-hour standard retrieval time meets the requirement while minimizing costs.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may choose S3 Glacier (Flexible Retrieval) because it is a well-known archival tier, but they overlook the specific 12-hour retrieval requirement and the lower cost of Glacier Deep Archive for long-term retention.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because S3 Glacier (Flexible Retrieval) has higher storage costs than Glacier Deep Archive for 7-year retention, and its standard retrieval time (1-5 minutes) is faster than needed, making it less cost-effective. Option C is wrong because S3 Intelligent-Tiering incurs a monthly monitoring and automation fee per object, and for data that is rarely accessed after 30 days, the cost savings from tiering do not offset the monitoring fee over 7 years. Option D is wrong because S3 One Zone-IA is not designed for long-term archival; it offers lower durability (99.5% vs 99.999999999%) and is not cost-effective for 7-year retention compared to Glacier Deep Archive.

14
MCQhard

A SysOps administrator reviews the CloudWatch metric data for an EC2 instance. The instance runs a web application that experiences high traffic between 12:00 and 14:00 UTC daily. The administrator wants to optimize costs while maintaining performance. What should the administrator do?

A.Convert the instance to a Reserved Instance to reduce hourly cost.
B.Replace the instance with a larger instance type and enable detailed monitoring.
C.Create an Auto Scaling group with a scheduled scaling policy to add instances during peak hours.
D.Increase the instance size to handle peak load at all times.
AnswerC

An Auto Scaling group with a scheduled scaling policy adds EC2 instances before the peak begins and removes them after it ends, aligning running capacity with the predicted demand. This is the correct solution because it handles the peak utilization while avoiding the cost of keeping that extra capacity running all day. You can define the schedule using a cron expression, and the group can also be configured with dynamic policies to absorb unexpected spikes beyond the scheduled capacity.

Why this answer

The instance has low CPU utilization most of the day but spikes to 90% during peak hours. Using a scheduled Auto Scaling to add instances during peak hours ensures performance without over-provisioning. Option A is wrong because the instance is not constantly at high utilization.

Option B is wrong because upgrading instance size increases cost during off-peak hours. Option D is wrong because a larger instance would be underutilized.

15
MCQmedium

A company runs a batch processing job on Amazon EMR every night. The job runs for 6 hours and requires a cluster of 20 m5.xlarge instances. The company wants to reduce costs while ensuring the job completes on time. Which solution is MOST cost-effective?

A.Use On-Demand instances for all nodes.
B.Purchase Reserved Instances for the entire cluster.
C.Use Spot Instances for core and task nodes and an On-Demand instance for the primary node.
D.Use Spot Instances for the primary node and On-Demand for core and task nodes.
AnswerC

This is the AWS-recommended cost-optimization pattern for transient EMR clusters: the primary node runs On-Demand to guarantee stable HDFS NameNode and ResourceManager availability, while core and task nodes run Spot Instances to exploit steep discounts (often 50–90% off On-Demand). Spot interruptions on core and task nodes are recoverable by EMR's instance-group resizing and task-node retries, but losing the primary node would fail the entire cluster. This mix preserves durability and responsiveness for the critical coordinator while dramatically lowering compute cost for the bulk of the cluster.

Why this answer

Amazon EMR clusters consist of a primary node (master), core nodes (which run HDFS and task processes), and task nodes (which only run tasks and can be lost without data loss). Spot Instances are ideal for task nodes because they can be interrupted without affecting HDFS data, and for core nodes if the cluster is resilient to interruptions (e.g., using EMRFS consistent view or if the job can tolerate some core node loss). The primary node must be On-Demand to avoid cluster termination if the Spot Instance is reclaimed.

This mix minimizes cost while ensuring the job completes on time.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the misconception that Spot Instances can be used for all node types, but the primary node must be On-Demand to avoid cluster termination, and core nodes may risk data loss if not using EMRFS.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because On-Demand instances for all nodes are significantly more expensive than Spot, and the job can tolerate interruptions on task and core nodes. Option B is wrong because Reserved Instances require a 1- or 3-year commitment, which is not cost-effective for a nightly 6-hour job and does not provide the same savings as Spot for short-term, fault-tolerant workloads. Option D is wrong because using Spot for the primary node risks cluster termination if the Spot Instance is reclaimed, which would cause the job to fail and not complete on time.

16
MCQeasy

A company runs a web application on a fleet of Amazon EC2 instances that operate 24/7 with a steady and predictable load. The SysOps administrator wants to minimize compute costs while ensuring the required capacity is always available. Which EC2 purchasing option should the administrator use?

A.Reserved Instances
B.Spot Instances
C.On-Demand Instances
D.Dedicated Hosts
AnswerA

Reserved Instances are the most cost-effective choice for a fleet of EC2 instances running a production web application that operates continuously. By committing to 1- or 3-year terms, you can save up to 72% compared to On-Demand pricing, with Flexible size benefits and the ability to change Availability Zones or instance sizes within the same family. Payment options (All Upfront, Partial Upfront, No Upfront) let you further optimize cost based on cash flow, and unused compute capacity is applied automatically. For an always-on workload, the upfront commitment is justified by the substantial savings.

Why this answer

Reserved Instances (RIs) are the correct choice because the workload runs 24/7 with steady, predictable load. RIs provide a significant discount (up to 72%) over On-Demand pricing in exchange for a one- or three-year commitment, ensuring cost minimization while guaranteeing capacity availability in the specified Availability Zone.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose Spot Instances for any cost-saving scenario, forgetting that Spot Instances can be terminated at any time, making them unsuitable for steady, predictable workloads that require constant availability.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because Spot Instances are designed for fault-tolerant, flexible workloads and can be interrupted with a 2-minute warning when EC2 needs capacity back, making them unsuitable for a steady, always-on web application. Option C is wrong because On-Demand Instances offer no discount and are the most expensive option for continuous 24/7 usage, failing to minimize compute costs. Option D is wrong because Dedicated Hosts provide physical servers dedicated for your use, which is unnecessary for cost optimization and typically incurs higher costs; they are used for licensing or compliance requirements, not for general cost savings.

17
MCQeasy

A company wants to receive an alert when its AWS spending exceeds $5,000 in a month. The SysOps administrator needs to set up a proactive alert that monitors actual costs. Which AWS service should be used?

A.AWS Cost Explorer
B.AWS Budgets
C.AWS Trusted Advisor
D.AWS CloudTrail
AnswerB

AWS Budgets is the native service for setting a custom cost budget, such as $5,000 per month, and receiving alerts when actual or forecasted charges reach or exceed that amount. You can define multiple alert thresholds (for example, 80% and 100%) and publish notifications to Amazon SNS, which can email you or trigger automated workflows. This makes AWS Budgets the correct solution for a spending alert.

Why this answer

AWS Budgets is the correct service because it allows you to set a cost budget that proactively sends alerts when actual costs exceed a specified threshold (e.g., $5,000 per month). Unlike Cost Explorer, which is an analytical tool, Budgets provides real-time notifications via Amazon SNS when costs reach or are forecasted to exceed the budgeted amount, enabling proactive monitoring of actual spending.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates confuse AWS Cost Explorer's historical analysis capabilities with proactive alerting, assuming it can send notifications, when in fact it only provides dashboards and reports without automated threshold-based alerts.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because AWS Cost Explorer is a visualization and analysis tool for historical cost data; it does not support proactive alerts based on actual cost thresholds. Option C is wrong because AWS Trusted Advisor inspects your AWS environment for cost optimization, security, and performance best practices, but it does not monitor or alert on actual spending against a specific budget. Option D is wrong because AWS CloudTrail records API activity for auditing and governance, not cost monitoring or alerting.

18
MCQeasy

A SysOps administrator wants to receive alerts when the estimated charges for an AWS account exceed a certain threshold. Which AWS service should be used?

A.AWS Trusted Advisor
B.AWS Cost Explorer
C.Amazon CloudWatch (billing metric)
D.AWS Budgets
AnswerD

AWS Budgets is the native service for creating cost, usage, and reservation budgets and for sending alerts when actual or forecasted spending exceeds defined thresholds. You can set multiple budget limits, filter by dimensions like service or linked account, and receive notifications via email or SNS. This meets the requirement to receive alerts when estimated charges reach a specified amount, making it the correct answer.

Why this answer

AWS Budgets enables you to set custom cost and usage budgets and receive alerts when your actual or forecasted costs exceed your budget thresholds. This is the correct service for receiving alerts on estimated charges. Option A (AWS Trusted Advisor) provides cost optimization recommendations but does not send billing alerts.

Option B (AWS Cost Explorer) allows you to analyze your costs but does not send proactive alerts. Option C (Amazon CloudWatch billing metric) does have billing metrics, but to set alerts on those metrics you must use AWS Budgets; CloudWatch itself is not the service for budget alerts.

19
MCQhard

A company uses Amazon CloudWatch Logs to store application logs from EC2 instances. The log volume is 100 GB per day, and logs are retained for 1 year. The SysOps administrator wants to reduce costs while maintaining compliance. Which solution is MOST effective?

A.Reduce the log retention period to 30 days.
B.Disable server-side encryption for the log group to reduce overhead.
C.Use CloudWatch Logs Insights to query logs instead of storing them.
D.Export logs to Amazon S3 and configure a lifecycle policy to transition them to Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days.
AnswerD

Exporting logs to Amazon S3 offloads them from CloudWatch Logs, where storage is more expensive, and then an S3 Lifecycle policy can automatically transition the objects to Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days. Glacier Deep Archive provides the lowest per-GB storage cost and still satisfies the one-year retention requirement, making this the most cost-effective compliant solution. For optimal savings, after a successful export you should also delete the original log group or set a very short CloudWatch retention so you do not pay for duplicate storage.

Why this answer

Exporting logs to Amazon S3 and transitioning them to Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days is the most cost-effective compliant solution because CloudWatch Logs storage is significantly more expensive per GB than S3, and Glacier Deep Archive costs roughly $0.00099/GB-month versus CloudWatch Logs at ~$0.03/GB-month. This preserves the 1-year retention requirement while cutting storage costs by over 90%.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests whether candidates know CloudWatch Logs storage is far more expensive than S3, and that 'reduce retention' is a trap when compliance explicitly requires long-term retention.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because reducing retention to 30 days violates the 1-year compliance requirement — cost reduction cannot come at the expense of regulatory retention. Option B is wrong because disabling server-side encryption does not meaningfully reduce CloudWatch Logs cost (encryption is not a billed line item) and would violate security/compliance requirements. Option C is wrong because CloudWatch Logs Insights is a query tool that operates on stored logs — it does not replace storage, and you cannot query logs you have not retained.

20
MCQmedium

A company runs a batch processing job on Amazon EC2 that runs for 2 hours every night. The job can tolerate interruptions and can resume from the last checkpoint. The SysOps administrator needs to minimize compute costs. Which EC2 purchasing option should be used?

A.On-Demand Instances
B.Spot Instances
C.Reserved Instances
D.Compute Savings Plans
AnswerB

Spot Instances provide access to spare AWS compute capacity at discounts of up to 90% versus On-Demand, but AWS can reclaim them with only a two-minute warning. Batch processing jobs with checkpointing are a canonical Spot use case because a reclaimed instance creates no data loss and the work can simply be retried. Using Spot Fleet or EC2 Fleet with multiple instance types and Availability Zones increases resilience and maintains throughput during interruptions, making Spot the optimal and lowest-cost choice.

Why this answer

Spot Instances are ideal for fault-tolerant, interruptible workloads like this batch processing job because they offer significant cost savings (up to 90% off On-Demand prices) in exchange for being reclaimable by AWS with a 2-minute warning. Since the job can resume from the last checkpoint, interruptions do not cause data loss or restart from scratch, making Spot Instances the most cost-effective choice.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose Reserved Instances or Savings Plans because they assume any long-running workload needs a commitment, but the question explicitly states the job is interruptible and runs only 2 hours nightly, making Spot Instances the correct cost-optimization choice.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because On-Demand Instances provide no discount and are not cost-minimizing for a predictable, interruptible workload. Option C is wrong because Reserved Instances require a 1- or 3-year commitment and are designed for steady-state, always-on workloads, not a 2-hour nightly job that can be interrupted. Option D is wrong because Compute Savings Plans offer discounts (up to 66%) but still require a 1- or 3-year commitment and are less cost-effective than Spot Instances for this specific use case.

21
Multi-Selecteasy

A company wants to reduce costs for their Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL database. Which TWO actions would help achieve this?

Select 2 answers
A.Enable Multi-AZ deployment for high availability.
B.Stop the database instance during non-business hours.
C.Enable deletion protection to prevent accidental deletion.
D.Increase the backup retention period to 35 days.
E.Purchase a Reserved Instance for the database instance.
AnswersB, E

Stopping the RDS DB instance during non-business hours places it in a 'stopped' state (you can stop it for up to 7 days at a time), during which compute and I/O charges are no longer incurred. Storage and backup costs continue, but you effectively eliminate the expensive instance-hour component for test and development environments that are only used in business hours. This delivers direct cost savings and is the correct answer here.

Why this answer

Option B is correct because stopping an RDS for PostgreSQL instance during non-business hours eliminates instance-hour charges while it is stopped (storage charges still apply), directly reducing compute costs for a database that is not needed around the clock. Option E is correct because purchasing a Reserved Instance for the DB instance provides a significant discount (up to roughly 69% versus On-Demand for a 3-year, all-upfront term) in exchange for a commitment to a specific instance family and Region, lowering the effective hourly rate for steady-state workloads. Option A is not cost-reducing because Multi-AZ runs a synchronous standby replica in a second AZ, roughly doubling instance and storage cost in exchange for high availability.

Option C is a safety control that prevents accidental deletion and has no positive effect on cost. Option D increases cost, since extending backup retention to 35 days keeps more automated backup storage beyond the free allocation and incurs additional backup storage charges.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the misconception that features like Multi-AZ or deletion protection reduce costs, when they actually increase cost or have no cost impact.

22
MCQmedium

A company runs a web application on a fleet of Amazon EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer. The application has predictable traffic patterns with high traffic during business hours and low traffic at night. The SysOps administrator wants to reduce compute costs while ensuring the application remains responsive during peak hours. The administrator has already implemented Auto Scaling based on CPU utilization. Which additional action should the administrator take to optimize costs?

A.Use On-Demand instances only
B.Purchase Reserved Instances for the baseline capacity and use Spot Instances for the additional capacity during peak hours
C.Increase the minimum number of instances in the Auto Scaling group
D.Use Dedicated Hosts to reduce licensing costs
AnswerB

This approach minimizes costs by applying the highest discount (Reserved Instances) to the steady-state capacity and leveraging the cost savings of Spot Instances for the flexible, peak-demand capacity. Auto Scaling can be configured to launch Spot Instances as needed, providing both cost efficiency and performance.

Why this answer

It combines Reserved Instances for predictable baseline capacity (lower cost per hour) with Spot Instances for elastic peak demand, leveraging Auto Scaling to handle variable traffic. This hybrid approach reduces compute costs compared to using On-Demand instances for all capacity, while maintaining responsiveness during peak hours.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may think increasing the minimum instance count (Option C) improves responsiveness, but it actually increases costs during low-traffic periods without addressing the cost optimization goal.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because using only On-Demand instances ignores cost-saving opportunities from Reserved or Spot Instances, leading to higher costs for predictable baseline traffic. Option C is wrong because increasing the minimum number of instances raises baseline costs unnecessarily, as the application has low traffic at night and does not require a higher minimum. Option D is wrong because Dedicated Hosts are designed for licensing or compliance requirements, not for general cost optimization, and they incur additional costs without addressing variable traffic patterns.

23
Multi-Selectmedium

A company is running a high-performance computing (HPC) workload on EC2. The workload is time-sensitive and runs for 2 hours every night. The company wants to minimize costs. Which THREE options should they consider? (Choose THREE.)

Select 3 answers
A.Purchase Reserved Instances for the nightly run.
B.Use an EFS or S3 as shared storage instead of EBS volumes.
C.Use smaller instance types and distribute the workload.
D.Use Dedicated Instances for performance isolation.
E.Use Spot Instances to take advantage of lower pricing.
AnswersB, C, E

Using a shared file system like Amazon EFS or object storage like Amazon S3 lets all HPC compute nodes access the same dataset without each node needing its own EBS volume copy. EBS volumes are per-instance block storage charged by GB-month plus IOPS, so duplicating data across hundreds of instances multiplies storage cost and also creates consistency problems when output is written locally. EFS automatically scales and is designed for shared POSIX access, while S3 is ideal for input/output datasets and checkpoint artifacts—both eliminate redundant EBS allocations.

Why this answer

Options B, C, and E are correct. B is correct because using EFS or S3 as shared storage reduces costs compared to attaching individual EBS volumes to each instance. C is correct because using smaller instance types in parallel can be more cost-effective for HPC workloads that can be parallelized.

E is correct because Spot Instances offer significant discounts for fault-tolerant workloads like HPC. Option A is incorrect because Reserved Instances require a 1-3 year commitment and would not be cost-effective for a 2-hour nightly job. Option D is incorrect because Dedicated Instances are more expensive and not necessary for this workload.

24
MCQeasy

A company is using Amazon S3 to host a static website. The website receives millions of requests per month from users around the world. The company wants to reduce latency and S3 data transfer costs. Which solution should the company implement?

A.Enable S3 replication to multiple regions.
B.Use Amazon CloudFront as a content delivery network in front of the S3 bucket.
C.Enable S3 Transfer Acceleration.
D.Use S3 Cross-Region Replication to replicate objects to all regions.
AnswerB

Amazon CloudFront fronts the S3 bucket with a global network of edge locations that cache static assets, so requests are served from the closest edge PoP rather than from the origin bucket directly. This reduces round-trip latency significantly for users worldwide and offloads repeated requests from S3. Additionally, CloudFront provides HTTPS termination and helps cut data transfer costs, as egress from edge locations is cheaper than direct S3 transfer for large audiences. This is the standard, designed solution for improving static site performance.

Why this answer

Amazon CloudFront is a content delivery network that caches content at edge locations, reducing latency and data transfer costs from S3. S3 Transfer Acceleration speeds up uploads but not downloads. S3 Replication does not reduce latency.

S3 Cross-Region Replication is for data redundancy, not performance.

25
MCQhard

A company stores video files in Amazon S3. The files are accessed frequently for the first week, then weekly for the next month, and then rarely after that. The files must be retained for 5 years and any access must be served within minutes. The SysOps administrator needs to minimize storage costs while meeting these requirements. Which lifecycle policy configuration is the most cost-effective?

A.Transition to S3 Standard-IA after 7 days, then to S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval after 30 days.
B.Transition to S3 One Zone-IA after 7 days, then to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days.
C.Transition to S3 Standard-IA after 7 days, then to S3 Glacier Instant Retrieval after 30 days.
D.Transition to S3 Intelligent-Tiering after 7 days.
AnswerC

S3 Standard-IA after 7 days is a sound choice because the files are accessed weekly during that period, and Standard-IA offers the same high durability (99.999999999%) and millisecond latency as Standard while reducing storage costs. After 30 days, transitioning to S3 Glacier Instant Retrieval further cuts storage costs while still providing millisecond retrieval times, so the videos remain instantly accessible on demand. This lifecycle meets the 'within minutes' requirement without incurring the higher retrieval latency or costs of Flexible Retrieval or Deep Archive, making it the most cost-effective and compliant strategy.

Why this answer

It transitions to S3 Standard-IA after 7 days (matching the frequent first-week access), then to S3 Glacier Instant Retrieval after 30 days (matching the weekly access for the next month). Glacier Instant Retrieval provides millisecond retrieval for rarely accessed data, meeting the 'within minutes' requirement while minimizing costs compared to Standard-IA or Intelligent-Tiering.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval or S3 Glacier Deep Archive as cost-effective options without verifying the retrieval time requirement, assuming 'Glacier' always means cheap but slow, while the question explicitly requires access 'within minutes'.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval has retrieval times of minutes to hours (not within minutes), failing the access requirement. Option B is wrong because S3 One Zone-IA does not provide the durability needed for long-term retention (5 years) and S3 Glacier Deep Archive has retrieval times of 12-48 hours, violating the 'within minutes' requirement. Option D is wrong because S3 Intelligent-Tiering incurs monitoring and automation costs that are not cost-effective for a predictable access pattern, and it does not transition to a cold storage tier that minimizes costs for rarely accessed data after 30 days.

26
MCQhard

A company uses an Amazon DynamoDB table with on-demand capacity mode for a variable workload. The SysOps administrator notices high costs and wants to reduce them without affecting application performance. Which action should the administrator take?

A.Switch the table to provisioned capacity mode with auto scaling.
B.Enable DynamoDB Accelerator (DAX) for caching.
C.Implement DynamoDB Global Tables to distribute data across regions.
D.Set a Time to Live (TTL) attribute to automatically expire old items.
AnswerA

On-demand capacity mode charges per request and is ideal for unpredictable traffic, but for workloads with steady or moderately variable usage, provisioned capacity with auto scaling is significantly cheaper because you commit to a baseline of capacity units and pay only for what you provision, while auto scaling adjusts the provisioned throughput based on real-time utilization via CloudWatch alarms, preventing over-provisioning and reducing cost without manual intervention.

Why this answer

Switching from on-demand to provisioned capacity with auto scaling reduces costs for variable workloads by allowing you to set a lower base capacity and scale only when needed, avoiding the premium per-request pricing of on-demand mode. Auto scaling adjusts read/write capacity based on actual utilization, ensuring application performance is maintained while eliminating the cost overhead of paying for every request at on-demand rates.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates assume on-demand mode is always the most cost-effective for variable workloads, but the exam tests that provisioned capacity with auto scaling can be cheaper for predictable variability, and that options like DAX or TTL address different cost components (latency or storage) rather than the per-request compute cost.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because DynamoDB Accelerator (DAX) is an in-memory caching service that reduces read latency and costs for repeated reads, but it does not address the core issue of high write costs or the per-request pricing model of on-demand mode; it adds an additional service cost. Option C is wrong because DynamoDB Global Tables replicate data across regions for disaster recovery and low-latency global access, which increases costs due to cross-region replication and additional storage, not reduces them. Option D is wrong because setting a Time to Live (TTL) attribute automatically expires old items to reduce storage costs, but it does not reduce the compute cost of read/write operations, which is the primary driver of high costs in on-demand mode.

27
Drag & Dropmedium

Drag and drop the steps to configure a VPC peering connection between two VPCs into the correct order.

Drag or tap steps into the slots.

Steps
Order
1Step 1
2Step 2
3Step 3
4Step 4

Why this order

First create the peering request, then accept it, then update route tables in both VPCs, and finally adjust security groups.

28
Multi-Selectmedium

A company is using Amazon RDS for MySQL with Multi-AZ deployment. They want to optimize costs while maintaining high availability. Which TWO actions should the SysOps administrator take?

Select 2 answers
A.Purchase Reserved Instances for the database instance.
B.Remove Multi-AZ to reduce costs.
C.Enable auto scaling for the RDS instance to handle variable load.
D.Review the instance size and downsize if it is over-provisioned.
E.Move to a single-AZ deployment and take snapshots for recovery.
AnswersA, D

Purchasing Reserved Instances for the RDS instance is a cost-optimization practice that does not affect the deployment architecture. Reserved Instances provide a significant hourly discount in exchange for a one- or three-year commitment, applied to the compute portion of the DB instance, while Multi-AZ and its automatic failover capability remain fully intact. This directly reduces operational costs without compromising high availability, making it a correct choice.

Why this answer

Option A is correct because purchasing Reserved Instances for the RDS DB instance provides a significant discount (up to ~69% for 3-year All Upfront terms) compared to On-Demand pricing, directly reducing cost while leaving the Multi-AZ high-availability configuration fully intact. Option D is correct because rightsizing the DB instance class (for example, moving from db.m5.xlarge to db.m5.large) eliminates spend on over-provisioned CPU/memory, and it can be done with a modification that preserves the Multi-AZ standby, so high availability is maintained. Option B is wrong because removing Multi-AZ sacrifices the synchronous standby replica and automatic failover, violating the requirement to maintain high availability.

Option C is wrong because RDS does not support auto scaling of the DB instance itself; only storage can be auto scaled, and read scaling requires Read Replicas, not instance auto scaling. Option E is wrong because a Single-AZ deployment plus snapshots is not highly available—snapshot restore creates a new instance and involves substantial RPO/RTO, so it fails the availability requirement.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the misconception that RDS supports compute auto scaling like EC2 Auto Scaling — candidates must remember RDS only auto-scales storage, not instance class.

29
MCQeasy

A company runs a web application on Amazon EC2 instances that have variable traffic patterns. The application experiences steady baseline traffic with occasional spikes. The SysOps administrator wants to optimize costs while ensuring performance during spikes. Which pricing model should be used for the baseline capacity and for the burst capacity?

A.Reserved Instances for baseline, Spot Instances for burst capacity
B.On-Demand Instances for baseline, Reserved Instances for burst capacity
C.Spot Instances for baseline, On-Demand Instances for burst capacity
D.Dedicated Hosts for baseline, Spot Instances for burst capacity
AnswerA

Reserved Instances (RIs) lock in a lower hourly rate (up to 72% off On-Demand) for a 1- or 3-year term, making them ideal for the steady, predictable baseline portion of the workload. Spot Instances, priced at up to 90% off On-Demand, provide cheap burst capacity that can be interrupted and replaced, which is acceptable for transient spikes. This combination minimizes cost while ensuring the always-on core stays reliable.

Why this answer

Reserved Instances provide a significant discount (up to 72%) over On-Demand for steady-state workloads, making them ideal for baseline capacity. Spot Instances offer the lowest cost (up to 90% discount) but can be interrupted with a 2-minute warning, which is acceptable for burst capacity that can tolerate interruptions or be designed to failover gracefully. This combination minimizes cost while ensuring the baseline always runs and burst capacity can be added during spikes.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often assume On-Demand is the only safe choice for baseline or that Spot Instances are too risky for any production use, but the question specifically allows for burst capacity that can tolerate interruptions, making Spot the optimal cost-saving choice.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because Reserved Instances are designed for predictable, long-term workloads, not for burst capacity that is temporary and variable; using them for bursts would lock in capacity that may go unused, wasting money. Option C is wrong because Spot Instances can be terminated at any time, making them unreliable for baseline capacity that must always be available; using On-Demand for bursts is more expensive than using Spot for bursts. Option D is wrong because Dedicated Hosts are a physical server dedicated to a single customer, which is overkill and costly for baseline capacity that does not require dedicated hardware or licensing restrictions; they do not provide cost optimization for variable traffic.

30
MCQmedium

A company runs a web application on EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB). The application experiences variable traffic with occasional spikes. The SysOps administrator wants to optimize costs while ensuring that the application can handle spikes without performance degradation. The current setup uses a fixed number of instances. Which action should the administrator take?

A.Purchase Reserved Instances for the current number of instances to reduce hourly cost.
B.Implement an Auto Scaling group with a target tracking scaling policy based on ALB request count per target.
C.Replace on-demand instances with Spot Instances for all traffic.
D.Increase the instance size to a compute-optimized type to handle spikes.
AnswerB

An Auto Scaling group with a target tracking scaling policy based on ALB request count per target continuously monitors the average number of requests each healthy instance receives. When the metric exceeds the target, the policy automatically launches additional EC2 instances, and when it falls below, it terminates instances, ensuring the fleet size tracks actual demand. This dynamic, horizontal scaling optimizes both cost and performance without manual intervention, making it the correct solution for a variable web workload.

Why this answer

An Auto Scaling group with a target tracking policy based on ALB request count per target automatically scales instances in and out to match traffic, handling spikes while minimizing cost during low-traffic periods. This directly addresses variable traffic with occasional spikes.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the misconception that Reserved Instances or larger instance types solve variable traffic — the exam expects recognition that elasticity (Auto Scaling) is required for spikes, while RIs only address steady-state cost.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Reserved Instances reduce hourly cost but lock in a fixed capacity — they do not help handle spikes and can increase cost if instances are underutilized. Option C is wrong because Spot Instances can be reclaimed with two minutes' notice and are unsuitable for all traffic in a production web application without a diversified, fault-tolerant architecture. Option D is wrong because increasing instance size to compute-optimized provides more capacity per instance but does not scale elastically with traffic, so it over-provisions during low traffic and may still be insufficient during spikes.

31
MCQmedium

A company runs a web application on Amazon EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. The application experiences steady traffic during business hours and very low traffic overnight. The SysOps administrator wants to optimize costs by using a mix of On-Demand and Spot Instances. The administrator also requires that the total capacity never falls below the baseline level needed during business hours, even if Spot Instances are reclaimed. Which combination of Auto Scaling features should be used?

A.Use a mixed instances policy and set the 'On-Demand Base' capacity to the minimum number of instances required during business hours, and 'On-Demand percentage above base' to 0% so that any additional capacity is Spot.
B.Use a launch template that specifies a Spot Instance type and set the total capacity to the desired level, relying on capacity rebalance to replace interrupted Spot Instances.
C.Purchase Compute Savings Plans to cover the entire Auto Scaling group, and use only Spot Instances for all capacity.
D.Configure the Auto Scaling group with a launch template that sets the instance market to 'spot' and use a scaling policy that always maintains the minimum capacity.
AnswerA

A mixed instances policy lets the Auto Scaling group combine On-Demand and Spot capacity while distributing across instance types. Setting On-Demand Base to the minimum needed during business hours creates a hardened floor that will always be fulfilled by On-Demand instances, and setting On-Demand percentage above base to 0% directs all growth beyond that floor to Spot Instances. This isolates the availability-critical baseline from Spot interruptions while saving money on the burst capacity, and it automatically balances between the two markets as the group scales in and out.

Why this answer

A mixed instances policy allows the Auto Scaling group to use both On-Demand and Spot Instances. By setting the 'On-Demand Base' capacity to the minimum number of instances required during business hours, you guarantee that baseline capacity is always fulfilled by On-Demand Instances, which are not subject to interruption. Setting 'On-Demand percentage above base' to 0% ensures that any additional capacity beyond the base is fulfilled by Spot Instances, optimizing cost while maintaining the required capacity floor.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often assume that using Spot Instances with a scaling policy or capacity rebalance alone can guarantee capacity, but they fail to recognize that only On-Demand Instances provide a hard guarantee against interruption, which is why the mixed instances policy with an explicit On-Demand base is required.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because using a launch template that specifies only a Spot Instance type and relying solely on capacity rebalance does not guarantee that the total capacity never falls below the baseline level during business hours; Spot Instances can be reclaimed at any time, and capacity rebalance only attempts to replace them but cannot guarantee uninterrupted capacity. Option C is wrong because Compute Savings Plans cover a commitment to spend a certain amount per hour but do not prevent Spot Instances from being reclaimed; if all capacity is Spot, the baseline could drop below the required level during interruptions. Option D is wrong because configuring the Auto Scaling group with a launch template that sets the instance market to 'spot' and using a scaling policy that always maintains the minimum capacity does not ensure that the minimum capacity is fulfilled by On-Demand Instances; Spot Instances can still be reclaimed, causing the actual capacity to fall below the minimum.

32
MCQhard

A company runs a large number of EC2 instances across multiple accounts and regions. The finance team needs to track costs per project and department. Each EC2 instance must be tagged with a ProjectID and Department tag. A SysOps administrator needs to ensure that all newly launched EC2 instances are tagged automatically before they can be used, and that existing untagged instances are retroactively tagged. The tags must be propagated to cost reports in AWS Cost Explorer. Which combination of steps will achieve this with the least operational overhead?

A.Use AWS Config with auto-remediation to tag new instances, and activate the tags as cost allocation tags. For existing instances, run the Tag Editor with a CSV import.
B.Create an AWS Lambda function that tags instances at launch via CloudTrail events, and use AWS Budgets to enforce tagging.
C.Use AWS Cost Categories to automatically group costs based on resource tags.
D.Ensure all AMIs used have tags that propagate to instances, and enable cost allocation tags.
AnswerA

This correctly combines a compliance-driven enforcement mechanism with a retroactive bulk-editing tool. AWS Config can run a managed rule that checks instances for the required tags and, if non-compliant, trigger auto-remediation via an SSM Automation document to apply those tags, covering new and modified resources continuously. Activating those tags in the Billing and Cost Management console makes them appear in cost allocation reports, and the Tag Editor can perform bulk search-and-tag across regions using a CSV import for any existing instances that predate the rule. Together, these steps tag both new and existing resources and ensure cost reporting reflects the tags.

Why this answer

AWS Config with auto-remediation can automatically tag newly launched EC2 instances using a custom Lambda function or SSM document triggered by a Config rule (e.g., 'required-tags'), ensuring compliance before instances are used. Activating the tags as cost allocation tags in AWS Cost Explorer allows the tags to appear in cost reports. For existing untagged instances, the Tag Editor with a CSV import provides a bulk, low-overhead method to retroactively apply tags across accounts and regions.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may assume AMI tags propagate to instances or that AWS Budgets can enforce tagging, but neither is true; the correct approach requires a combination of proactive enforcement (Config auto-remediation) and retroactive bulk tagging (Tag Editor).

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because AWS Budgets cannot enforce tagging; it only sends alerts based on cost or usage thresholds, and does not automatically tag instances or prevent untagged instances from being used. Option C is wrong because AWS Cost Categories group costs based on existing tags or accounts, but they do not automatically tag instances or ensure that newly launched instances are tagged before use. Option D is wrong because AMI tags do not propagate to instances launched from them; instance tags must be explicitly specified at launch or applied via automation, and enabling cost allocation tags alone does not retroactively tag existing untagged instances.

33
MCQeasy

A company runs a web application on EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer. The application experiences unpredictable traffic spikes. Which AWS service should be used to automatically adjust the number of EC2 instances based on demand, optimizing cost and performance?

A.AWS Auto Scaling
B.Amazon CloudWatch
C.Elastic Load Balancing
D.AWS Lambda
AnswerA

AWS Auto Scaling is the correct service because it directly manages the size of an EC2 Auto Scaling group by launching or terminating instances in response to conditions you define. It uses scaling policies (e.g., step, target tracking, or scheduled scaling) that rely on CloudWatch metrics, such as CPU utilization or request count, to automatically adjust capacity. This is the only option here that actually performs the act of scaling EC2 instances, maintaining both performance and cost efficiency.

Why this answer

AWS Auto Scaling is the correct service because it automatically adjusts the number of EC2 instances in response to demand, using scaling policies based on metrics like CPU utilization or request count. This ensures that the application can handle traffic spikes without manual intervention, optimizing both cost (by scaling down during low demand) and performance (by scaling up during spikes). The service integrates directly with the Application Load Balancer to register and deregister instances as needed.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse the monitoring service (CloudWatch) with the scaling service, or assume Elastic Load Balancing can handle scaling by itself, but neither directly adjusts instance count—only AWS Auto Scaling performs the actual scaling actions.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B (Amazon CloudWatch) is wrong because it is a monitoring and observability service that collects metrics and logs, but it does not directly adjust EC2 instance counts; it can trigger Auto Scaling actions via alarms, but the scaling itself is performed by AWS Auto Scaling. Option C (Elastic Load Balancing) is wrong because it distributes incoming traffic across existing EC2 instances but does not add or remove instances; it relies on Auto Scaling to manage capacity. Option D (AWS Lambda) is wrong because it is a serverless compute service for running code in response to events, not for managing EC2 instance scaling; it cannot directly adjust the number of EC2 instances behind a load balancer.

34
MCQeasy

A company hosts a static website on Amazon S3 with public read access. The website content is updated weekly. The SysOps administrator notices that the monthly S3 costs are higher than expected. The website receives about 10,000 requests per day, and each object is small (average 50 KB). The administrator wants to reduce costs without affecting the user experience. The website does not require HTTPS or custom domain at this time. Which action should the administrator take?

A.Enable default encryption for the S3 bucket.
B.Transition the objects to S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval.
C.Place an Amazon CloudFront distribution in front of the S3 bucket.
D.Enable S3 Versioning to prevent accidental deletions.
AnswerC

Placing a CloudFront distribution in front of the S3 bucket caches website objects at edge locations worldwide, so the vast majority of user requests are served from edge caches, not by direct S3 GETs. This dramatically reduces the number of S3 requests billed on a per-request basis, and data transfer from S3 to CloudFront is not charged, lowering egress costs. Additionally, you can restrict direct S3 access with an origin access control and use caching policies to further optimize performance and cost.

Why this answer

Placing an Amazon CloudFront distribution in front of the S3 bucket reduces costs by caching content at edge locations, thereby reducing the number of GET requests to S3 and leveraging lower CloudFront data transfer rates. This does not affect user experience because cached content is served quickly. Option A is incorrect: enabling default encryption adds encryption but does not reduce costs; it may increase overhead slightly.

Option B is incorrect: S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval is designed for archival storage with high retrieval latency and costs, making it unsuitable for serving a static website. Option D is incorrect: enabling S3 Versioning increases storage costs by retaining multiple versions of objects, which does not lower expenses.

35
MCQeasy

A SysOps administrator notices that an EC2 instance's CPU utilization is consistently above 90% during peak hours. Which action will improve performance without over-provisioning resources?

A.Use Spot Instances instead of On-Demand.
B.Increase the number of EBS volumes attached to the instance.
C.Change the instance type to a larger size, such as moving from t3.medium to t3.large.
D.Configure Auto Scaling to add more instances during peak hours.
AnswerC

Resizing the EC2 instance to a larger type, such as changing from t3.medium to t3.large, is a vertical scaling operation that allocates more compute resources to the same virtual machine. A larger instance type typically provides more vCPUs, higher baseline CPU performance, and more memory, directly increasing the capacity to process instructions without queueing, thereby reducing CPU utilization. For t3 families, the larger size also raises the CPU credit earning rate and baseline (e.g., from 20% to 30% for medium to large), so even modest workloads experience fewer credit exhaustions and less throttling.

Why this answer

Changing the instance type to a larger size (e.g., from t3.medium to t3.large) vertically scales the instance, providing more vCPUs and memory to handle the increased CPU load during peak hours. This directly addresses the high CPU utilization without over-provisioning, as you are only scaling up the specific resource that is constrained. Spot Instances (A) do not improve performance; they offer lower cost but same performance.

Increasing EBS volumes (B) does not affect CPU performance. Auto Scaling (D) adds more instances (horizontal scaling), which can over-provision if the single instance's capacity is sufficient after a vertical scale-up.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse horizontal scaling (Auto Scaling) with vertical scaling, assuming adding more instances is always the best performance fix, but the question explicitly asks to avoid over-provisioning, making a single larger instance the more efficient choice.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Spot Instances provide the same CPU performance as On-Demand instances; they are a pricing model, not a performance enhancement, and do not reduce CPU utilization. Option B is wrong because increasing the number of EBS volumes does not affect CPU utilization; EBS volumes handle storage I/O, not compute processing. Option D is wrong because Auto Scaling adds more instances horizontally, which can lead to over-provisioning if the workload can be handled by a single larger instance; it also introduces additional complexity and cost for managing multiple instances.

36
Multi-Selectmedium

Which THREE AWS services can be used to monitor and optimize costs? (Choose THREE.)

Select 3 answers
A.AWS Trusted Advisor
B.AWS Cost Explorer
C.AWS Budgets
D.AWS Shield
E.AWS CloudFormation
AnswersA, B, C

AWS Trusted Advisor continuously inspects your AWS environment and delivers real-time recommendations across five categories: cost optimization, performance, security, fault tolerance, and service limits. For cost optimization, it identifies underutilized Amazon EC2 instances, idle RDS databases, and untapped Reserved Instance or Savings Plan opportunities, making it a core tool for right-sizing and eliminating waste.

Why this answer

AWS Trusted Advisor provides cost optimization recommendations by analyzing your AWS environment and identifying idle resources, underutilized instances, and reserved instance opportunities. It offers specific checks like 'Low Utilization Amazon EC2 Instances' and 'Idle Load Balancers' that directly help reduce spending.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may confuse AWS Shield (a security service) with cost-related services due to its name similarity to 'Shield' implying protection, or assume CloudFormation's resource management includes cost tracking, but neither provides cost monitoring or optimization capabilities.

37
MCQmedium

A company stores 1 PB of data in Amazon S3 Standard. The data is accessed frequently for the first 30 days, then rarely accessed afterwards. The company needs to optimize storage costs. What should they do?

A.Move all objects to S3 Intelligent-Tiering immediately.
B.Delete objects older than 30 days using S3 Lifecycle expiration.
C.Manually change the storage class of each object to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days.
D.Configure an S3 Lifecycle policy to transition objects to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days, then to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days.
AnswerD

Configuring an S3 Lifecycle policy to transition objects from S3 Standard to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days and then to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days is the most effective approach because it automates cost optimization while preserving data availability based on predictable access patterns. Standard-IA reduces storage costs for infrequently accessed data after the initial month, and Glacier Deep Archive provides the lowest storage cost for long-term archival after 90 days. Lifecycle rules handle the transitions in batches, avoid manual effort, and ensure compliance with storage-class minimums. This balances immediate accessibility with long-term cost savings for the 1 PB dataset.

Why this answer

It uses an S3 Lifecycle policy to automatically transition objects to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days (when access drops), then to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days for long-term cold storage. This balances cost and access needs: Standard-IA offers lower storage cost than Standard for infrequent access, and Glacier Deep Archive provides the lowest cost for rarely accessed data after 90 days. The policy automates the transitions, avoiding manual effort and ensuring cost optimization without data loss.

Exam trap

AWS often tests the misconception that deleting old data is an acceptable cost optimization strategy, but the trap here is that deletion causes data loss, whereas lifecycle transitions preserve data while reducing costs.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because moving all objects to S3 Intelligent-Tiering immediately does not optimize costs for the first 30 days of frequent access (Intelligent-Tiering has a higher per-object monitoring cost and a minimum 30-day charge for objects moved to infrequent access tiers), and it may not be cost-effective for 1 PB of data with a predictable access pattern. Option B is wrong because deleting objects older than 30 days would cause permanent data loss, which is not a storage optimization strategy but a data retention failure; the requirement is to optimize costs while retaining data for potential rare access. Option C is wrong because manually changing the storage class of each object to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days is impractical for 1 PB of objects (millions of objects) and violates the need for automation; S3 Lifecycle policies are designed to automate such transitions without manual intervention.

38
MCQeasy

A company is using AWS CloudFormation to deploy infrastructure. They want to reduce costs by identifying unused resources. Which AWS service should they use to monitor and report on resource utilization and cost?

A.AWS Trusted Advisor
B.AWS Config
C.Amazon CloudWatch
D.AWS CloudTrail
AnswerA

AWS Trusted Advisor is the correct choice because it directly provides cost optimization recommendations, such as identifying idle resources, underutilized Amazon EC2 instances, unattached Elastic IP addresses, and Amazon EBS volumes with low I/O activity. For a company deploying with CloudFormation, Trusted Advisor can highlight which provisioned resources are over- or under-provisioned, enabling right-sizing or termination to reduce spend. Its cost optimization checks also suggest purchasing Reserved Instances or Savings Plans based on usage patterns, making it the only listed service that explicitly targets cost reduction.

Why this answer

AWS Trusted Advisor provides cost optimization checks, including identifying idle resources and underutilized instances, helping reduce costs. Option B (AWS Config) is incorrect because it tracks configuration changes and compliance, not cost optimization. Option C (Amazon CloudWatch) is incorrect because it monitors metrics and logs, not cost optimization directly.

Option D (AWS CloudTrail) is incorrect because it logs API activity, not cost or resource utilization.

39
MCQhard

A company runs a read-heavy database workload on Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL with a primary instance and two read replicas. The SysOps administrator observes that the read replicas frequently experience high replica lag during peak hours, causing stale reads for the application. The administrator needs to reduce replica lag while optimizing costs. The workload is predictable, with spikes during business hours and low traffic at night. Which combination of actions should the administrator take?

A.Convert the read replicas to Multi-AZ instances to improve the replication process and reduce lag.
B.Upgrade the instance class of the read replicas to a larger type with more CPU and memory to handle the increased WAL replay rate.
C.Add additional read replicas to distribute the read load and reduce the lag on each individual replica.
D.Upgrade the primary DB instance to a larger class with increased IOPS to reduce the amount of data that needs to be replicated.
AnswerB

Replica lag occurs when the replica cannot keep up with the rate of changes from the primary. Increasing the replica's instance size gives it more resources to apply WAL data faster, reducing lag. This directly addresses the performance bottleneck.

Why this answer

Upgrading the read replica instance class provides more CPU and memory, which directly increases the WAL replay rate. In RDS for PostgreSQL, replica lag is primarily caused by the replica's inability to apply WAL changes as fast as the primary generates them. A larger instance class alleviates this bottleneck without incurring the cost of upgrading the primary instance.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse replica lag with primary performance, leading them to upgrade the primary (Option D) or add more replicas (Option C), when the real bottleneck is the replica's WAL replay capacity.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Multi-AZ is a high-availability feature that uses synchronous replication to a standby in a different AZ, not a solution for read replica lag; it does not improve asynchronous replication performance and adds cost without addressing the WAL replay bottleneck. Option C is wrong because adding more read replicas distributes the read load but does not reduce the lag on each individual replica; each replica still must apply the same volume of WAL changes from the primary, so lag per replica remains unchanged. Option D is wrong because upgrading the primary instance class with increased IOPS reduces the primary's write latency but does not affect the replica's ability to replay WAL; the primary already generates WAL at the same rate, and the bottleneck is on the replica side.

40
MCQmedium

A company stores infrequently accessed data in S3 Standard. They want to reduce storage costs without compromising immediate accessibility. What is the MOST cost-effective solution?

A.Use S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval.
B.Use S3 Standard-IA storage class.
C.Move data to S3 Intelligent-Tiering.
D.Create a lifecycle policy to delete objects after 30 days.
AnswerB

S3 Standard-IA is purpose-built for data that is accessed infrequently but requires millisecond access when requested. It offers the same durability and high availability as S3 Standard at a lower storage price, with a per-GB retrieval fee and a 30-day minimum storage duration. This directly matches the company's usage pattern of infrequently accessed data without sacrificing immediate availability.

Why this answer

The most cost-effective solution is to use S3 Standard-IA (Option B). S3 Standard-IA is designed for infrequently accessed data that requires immediate access; it offers lower storage costs than S3 Standard while maintaining low latency and high throughput. Option A (S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval) has even lower storage cost but retrieval times of minutes to hours, which does not meet the requirement of immediate accessibility.

Option C (S3 Intelligent-Tiering) automatically moves data between tiers to optimize costs, but it includes monitoring and automation charges that may not be cost-effective for data that is consistently infrequently accessed; also, it does not guarantee lower cost than Standard-IA for this pattern. Option D (create a lifecycle policy to delete after 30 days) would lose data permanently and is not a storage class; it also does not address cost savings for long-term storage.

41
Multi-Selecthard

A company runs a web application on EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. The application experiences variable traffic. The company wants to improve performance and reduce costs. Which THREE actions should the company take?

Select 3 answers
A.Implement dynamic scaling policies based on CPU utilization.
B.Reduce the number of instances in the Auto Scaling group to lower costs.
C.Use an Application Load Balancer with connection draining.
D.Use a mix of On-Demand and Spot Instances in the Auto Scaling group.
E.Increase the instance size to handle peak load.
AnswersA, C, D

Dynamic scaling policies using a target tracking policy based on CPU utilization are correct because they automatically adjust the Auto Scaling group's desired capacity in real time to maintain CPU at a defined target (e.g., 60%). This prevents both over-provisioning and under-provisioning, enabling the web application to handle variable traffic without manual intervention, and it optimizes cost by only adding instances when demand actually increases.

Why this answer

Option A is correct because dynamic scaling policies based on CPU utilization let the Auto Scaling group add instances when demand rises and remove them when demand falls, directly improving performance during peaks while reducing cost during troughs. Option C is correct because an Application Load Balancer distributes incoming HTTP/HTTPS traffic across healthy instances and connection draining (deregistration delay) allows in-flight requests to complete before an instance is terminated during scale-in, preventing errors and improving availability. Option D is correct because mixing On-Demand and Spot Instances in the Auto Scaling group lowers compute costs by using discounted Spot capacity for fault-tolerant portions of the workload while On-Demand instances provide baseline reliability.

Option B is not appropriate because simply reducing the number of instances lowers capacity and would degrade performance under variable traffic rather than improve it. Option E is not appropriate because increasing instance size (vertical scaling) is less elastic and typically more expensive than horizontal scaling, and it does not efficiently match variable traffic or reduce costs.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the misconception that cost optimization means simply reducing instance count or resizing instances, when the correct answer is almost always elasticity (dynamic scaling) plus purchase-option mixing.

42
MCQeasy

A company uses Amazon CloudWatch to monitor its AWS resources. The company wants to receive alerts when CPU utilization of an EC2 instance exceeds 80% for 5 consecutive minutes. What is the MOST efficient way to achieve this?

A.Use CloudWatch Logs to parse CPU utilization from system logs and trigger an alert.
B.Use Amazon EventBridge to schedule a Lambda function that checks CPU utilization.
C.Use AWS CloudTrail to monitor EC2 instance metrics.
D.Create a CloudWatch alarm on the CPUUtilization metric with a threshold of 80% for 5 consecutive periods.
AnswerD

This is the standard, native approach: CloudWatch continuously ingests the CPUUtilization metric from EC2, and an alarm evaluates that metric against a threshold over a specified number of consecutive evaluation periods. By setting the threshold to 80% and the evaluation periods to 5, you get an alert only after the CPU stays above 80% for five straight minutes, matching the requirement exactly. This requires no additional code, no separate services, and integrates directly with SNS for notification, making it the most efficient and reliable solution.

Why this answer

A CloudWatch alarm on the CPUUtilization metric with a threshold of 80% for 5 consecutive periods (each period being 1 minute) directly monitors the metric and triggers an alert when the condition is met. This is the most efficient and native way to achieve the requirement, as it requires no custom code or log parsing.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the misconception that CloudTrail or custom Lambda functions are needed for metric monitoring; the trap is that candidates may overlook the native CloudWatch alarm capability and choose more complex solutions.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because parsing CPU utilization from system logs is inefficient and unreliable; CPU utilization is already available as a native CloudWatch metric, so log parsing adds unnecessary complexity. Option B is wrong because scheduling a Lambda function to check CPU utilization introduces custom code, additional cost, and latency, and is not the most efficient method. Option C is wrong because AWS CloudTrail records API activity, not resource metrics like CPU utilization, so it cannot be used to monitor CPU usage.

43
MCQhard

A company has a production AWS account that uses Consolidated Billing with several member accounts. The finance team wants to identify the top cost drivers and allocate costs to different departments. Which AWS tool should be used to visualize and allocate costs?

A.AWS Organizations
B.AWS Trusted Advisor
C.AWS Cost Explorer
D.AWS Budgets
AnswerC

AWS Cost Explorer is a cost management service with an intuitive interface that lets you explore and visualize your AWS costs over time. You can filter and group by service, linked account, region, instance type, and cost-allocation tags, which enables you to produce custom views for cost allocation and chargebacks. Additionally, it supports forecasting and report sharing, making it the appropriate tool for detailed cost analysis and allocation.

Why this answer

AWS Cost Explorer allows visualization and filtering of costs by tags, accounts, and services, enabling cost allocation and identification of top cost drivers. AWS Organizations (A) is used to centrally manage policies and accounts but does not provide cost visualization. AWS Trusted Advisor (B) offers best practice recommendations but not detailed cost analysis.

AWS Budgets (D) sets budget alerts but does not provide historical cost exploration or allocation.

44
MCQmedium

A company is running a production web application on EC2 instances behind an ALB. The application experiences predictable traffic spikes during business hours. Which cost optimization strategy would be MOST effective?

A.Configure Scheduled Scaling to add instances before the spike and remove after.
B.Use Spot Instances for the entire workload.
C.Use larger instance types to handle the spikes without scaling.
D.Use On-Demand instances exclusively to handle the spikes.
AnswerA

Configure Scheduled Scaling to add instances before the spike and remove after. This uses Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling time-based policies to proactively adjust the desired capacity, so instances are fully registered and warmed up when the traffic surge hits. Unlike reactive dynamic scaling, scheduled scaling eliminates the lag that can cause latency or throttling during flash traffic, and then scales back down automatically after the spike to avoid paying for unused resources.

Why this answer

The most effective cost optimization strategy because Scheduled Scaling allows you to increase capacity predictably before traffic spikes and decrease afterward, ensuring you only pay for what you need. Option B is incorrect because Spot Instances can be interrupted and are not suitable for production workloads that require high availability. Option C is incorrect because using larger instances does not dynamically adjust to spikes and may lead to over-provisioning during low traffic.

Option D is incorrect because On-Demand instances are more expensive than using scheduled scaling with a mix of Reserved Instances or Savings Plans to cover the baseline and scheduled scaling for the spikes.

45
MCQhard

A company uses Amazon CloudFront to deliver content to a global audience. The origin is an Application Load Balancer in us-east-1. The SysOps administrator wants to reduce costs by minimizing the number of requests that reach the origin server. Which action should the administrator take?

A.Enable CloudFront Origin Shield.
B.Configure multiple origins for failover.
C.Enable CloudFront Web Application Firewall (WAF) integration.
D.Increase the cache TTL for CloudFront distributions.
AnswerA

CloudFront Origin Shield acts as an intermediary caching layer between all edge locations and the origin, located in a specific AWS Region. When an edge cache misses, it forwards the request to Origin Shield; if the object is already cached there, Origin Shield serves it directly, preventing a redundant fetch to the origin. This aggregation of requests from multiple edges substantially reduces the number of origin requests and the associated compute and data transfer costs, while also providing a single point for cache fills and origin protection.

Why this answer

CloudFront Origin Shield acts as an additional caching layer in front of the origin, reducing the load on the origin by consolidating requests from multiple edge locations. This minimizes the number of requests that reach the Application Load Balancer, directly lowering origin request costs and improving cache hit ratio.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often assume increasing cache TTL is the primary way to reduce origin requests, but they overlook that Origin Shield directly reduces origin load by consolidating requests, which is a more targeted cost optimization feature for CloudFront.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because configuring multiple origins for failover improves availability, not cost reduction, and does not reduce the number of requests reaching the origin. Option C is wrong because enabling CloudFront WAF integration provides security filtering (e.g., against SQL injection or DDoS), but does not minimize origin requests; it may even add latency for inspection. Option D is wrong because increasing cache TTL can improve cache hit ratio, but it does not guarantee fewer origin requests if the content is already cached; it only extends the time before a cached object expires, and may lead to stale content if not managed properly.

46
MCQeasy

A SysOps administrator notices that an Amazon RDS DB instance is running at 10% CPU utilization consistently. The instance has 8 vCPUs and 32 GB RAM. The application's performance is adequate. Which action will reduce costs without affecting performance?

A.Enable Multi-AZ deployment for the DB instance.
B.Change the DB instance to a smaller instance type.
C.Change the storage type from gp2 to gp3.
D.Increase the provisioned IOPS.
AnswerB

RDS instance pricing is based on the instance class and size, so choosing a smaller class directly reduces the hourly compute charge. Since CPU utilization is consistently low, a smaller instance type can meet the workload's performance requirements while still leaving headroom for spikes. This is the most straightforward and effective way to reduce database costs without sacrificing availability or storage.

Why this answer

The DB instance is over-provisioned for the current workload, as evidenced by the consistently low CPU utilization (10%) and adequate application performance. By changing to a smaller instance type, you reduce compute costs directly while maintaining sufficient capacity for the workload. This is the most straightforward cost optimization action when performance requirements are already met.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may confuse cost optimization with performance improvement or high availability, leading them to select Multi-AZ or IOPS changes, which increase costs rather than reduce them.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because enabling Multi-AZ deployment increases costs by provisioning a standby replica in a different Availability Zone and does not reduce costs; it improves availability and fault tolerance. Option C is wrong because changing storage type from gp2 to gp3 may reduce storage costs but does not address the over-provisioned compute resources (vCPUs and RAM) that are the primary cost driver here. Option D is wrong because increasing provisioned IOPS increases costs and is unnecessary when performance is already adequate and CPU utilization is low.

47
MCQhard

A company is running a stateful web application on EC2 instances in an Auto Scaling group. The application requires low latency and high throughput. Currently, the application is experiencing performance degradation during peak hours. Which scaling strategy should the SysOps administrator implement to improve performance and optimize cost?

A.Step scaling policy based on memory utilization
B.Scheduled scaling with fixed times
C.Simple scaling policy based on CPU utilization
D.Predictive scaling policy
AnswerD

A predictive scaling policy uses machine learning to analyze historical traffic patterns and forecast future demand, allowing Auto Scaling to launch instances ahead of the actual spike. This proactive approach is ideal for a stateful web application because it eliminates the cold start lag and reduces the risk of insufficient capacity during sudden bursts. It also improves cost efficiency by avoiding over-provisioning, and when combined with a dynamic scaling policy, it can handle both anticipated trends and unexpected deviations. The key is that predictive scaling learns from recurring patterns (daily, weekly, or monthly) and smooths out the capacity curve before the load actually arrives.

Why this answer

Predictive scaling is the correct choice because it uses machine learning to analyze historical traffic patterns and proactively adjust capacity before demand spikes, which is ideal for a stateful web application experiencing predictable peak-hour performance degradation. This approach ensures low latency and high throughput by pre-warming instances, while optimizing cost by avoiding over-provisioning during off-peak periods.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose scheduled scaling (Option B) because they see 'peak hours' and assume a fixed schedule, but they miss that predictive scaling uses ML to handle variable peak patterns more efficiently than rigid schedules.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because memory utilization is not a reliable metric for scaling a stateful web application that requires low latency and high throughput; step scaling based on memory would react to memory pressure rather than the actual workload demand, potentially causing delayed scaling and performance issues. Option B is wrong because scheduled scaling with fixed times assumes perfectly predictable traffic patterns and cannot adapt to variations in peak-hour load, leading to either under-provisioning or over-provisioning and wasted cost. Option C is wrong because simple scaling policies based on CPU utilization have a cooldown period that prevents rapid scaling, causing slow response to sudden traffic spikes and degrading performance during peak hours.

48
MCQeasy

A company is using Amazon CloudFront to deliver content globally. Which feature can help reduce costs by minimizing data transfer from the origin?

A.Enable multiple origins for load balancing.
B.Configure caching to serve content from edge locations.
C.Configure custom SSL certificates.
D.Use Lambda@Edge to process requests.
AnswerB

CloudFront serves cached objects directly from edge locations that are geographically closer to viewers, so repeat requests for the same content are satisfied without contacting the origin server. This reduces the number of origin fetches and, consequently, the data transfer out of your origin, which is often the largest variable cost. Setting appropriate TTLs and cache policies (including honoring Cache-Control headers) maximizes cache hits and minimizes origin bandwidth usage.

Why this answer

Configuring caching in CloudFront allows content to be served from edge locations, reducing the number of requests that need to go to the origin. This minimizes data transfer from the origin and lowers costs. Option A is incorrect because multiple origins are for routing different content, not for reducing origin transfer; load balancing doesn't inherently reduce data transfer costs.

Option C is incorrect because custom SSL certificates secure connections but do not affect data transfer costs. Option D is incorrect because Lambda@Edge runs custom code at edge locations but does not directly reduce the volume of data transferred from the origin; it may even add compute costs.

49
MCQhard

A company has an S3 bucket that stores millions of small objects (1-10 KB) and uses S3 Standard storage. The bucket receives frequent PUT requests and occasional GET requests. The monthly bill shows high costs for S3 PUT requests. Which action would reduce costs?

A.Move the objects to S3 Glacier Deep Archive to reduce storage cost.
B.Aggregate small objects into larger files (e.g., 1 MB) before uploading to S3.
C.Move the objects to S3 Intelligent-Tiering to optimize storage costs.
D.Use S3 Lifecycle policies to transition objects to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days.
AnswerB

Batching the small objects into larger files, such as 1 MiB objects, directly attacks the root cause because S3 bills every PUT request individually regardless of object size. One million 1 KB PUTs cost the same per-request as one million 1 MB PUTs, so consolidating 1,000 small objects into a single object reduces the number of PUT requests by 99.9%. This is the intended way to reduce per-request charges while retaining the same logical data, and it also lowers the overhead of managing millions of keys.

Why this answer

S3 PUT request charges are per-request, so uploading millions of tiny objects incurs millions of PUT charges. Aggregating small objects into larger files (e.g., 1 MB) before upload dramatically reduces the number of PUT requests and therefore the request cost. This directly targets the line item the bill shows as high.

Exam trap

The trap is assuming storage-class changes reduce request costs; candidates must isolate that the bill's high line item is PUT requests, which only aggregation (fewer requests) addresses.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Glacier Deep Archive reduces storage cost, not PUT request cost, and retrieval is expensive and slow; it does not address the frequent PUT pattern. Option C is wrong because Intelligent-Tiering optimizes storage class based on access patterns but still charges per PUT and adds monitoring/automation fees, so it does not reduce request costs. Option D is wrong because lifecycle transition to Standard-IA reduces storage cost after 30 days but does not reduce the PUT request charges incurred at upload time.

50
MCQeasy

A company runs a batch processing job on a single EC2 instance that runs for 2 hours every night. The job is fault-tolerant and can be interrupted. The SysOps administrator wants to minimize compute costs. What is the MOST cost-effective solution?

A.Use an On-Demand instance to ensure the job runs every night.
B.Purchase a Reserved Instance for 1 year to get a discount.
C.Launch a Dedicated Host to ensure consistent performance.
D.Use a Spot Instance that can be interrupted but is significantly cheaper.
AnswerD

Spot Instances are the correct choice because they offer significant cost savings, up to 90% off On-Demand pricing, in exchange for the possibility of interruption with a two-minute warning. A batch processing job is typically fault-tolerant and can be designed to checkpoint progress or be reprocessed from the last saved state, making it an ideal Spot workload. Even if Spot capacity is reclaimed, you can automatically relaunch the instance or use AWS Batch to retry the job, so the job still completes every night at a fraction of the cost.

Why this answer

A Spot Instance is the most cost-effective choice because the job is fault-tolerant and can be interrupted, allowing you to leverage unused AWS EC2 capacity at up to 90% discount compared to On-Demand pricing. Since the job runs for only 2 hours nightly and can handle interruptions, Spot Instances provide the lowest compute cost while meeting the workload requirements.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose Reserved Instances for any recurring workload, failing to recognize that the short duration (2 hours/night) and interruptibility of the job make Spot Instances far more cost-effective without the long-term commitment.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because using an On-Demand instance incurs the highest per-hour cost with no discount, which is not cost-effective for a fault-tolerant batch job that can be interrupted. Option B is wrong because purchasing a Reserved Instance for 1 year requires a long-term commitment and upfront payment, which is wasteful for a job that runs only 2 hours per night (approximately 730 hours per year) and does not benefit from the steady-state usage discount. Option C is wrong because a Dedicated Host is a physical server dedicated to your use, which is significantly more expensive and unnecessary for a single batch processing job that does not require dedicated hardware or licensing compliance.

51
MCQeasy

A SysOps administrator wants to identify underutilized Amazon EC2 instances that could be downsized to reduce costs. The administrator needs a tool that provides recommendations based on historical utilization data. Which AWS service should the administrator use?

A.AWS Trusted Advisor
B.AWS Compute Optimizer
C.AWS Cost Explorer
D.AWS Budgets
AnswerB

AWS Compute Optimizer is the correct service because it uses machine learning to analyze historical CloudWatch metrics—CPU, memory, network, and storage—and generates specific, right-sized recommendations for EC2 instances. It can suggest downsizing an instance family or size, or even terminating instances that are consistently underutilized, while estimating the monthly cost savings and performance risk. This granular, workload-specific analysis directly addresses the goal of identifying underutilized Amazon EC2 resources.

Why this answer

AWS Compute Optimizer is the correct service because it analyzes historical utilization metrics (CPU, memory, network, and storage) for EC2 instances and generates specific downsizing recommendations to reduce cost without sacrificing performance. It uses machine learning to identify underutilized resources and provides actionable guidance, making it the ideal tool for this use case.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse AWS Trusted Advisor's idle instance check with Compute Optimizer's detailed, ML-driven downsizing recommendations, but Trusted Advisor only flags instances with low average CPU utilization (e.g., below 10%) without considering memory, network, or storage patterns.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because AWS Trusted Advisor provides general best-practice checks (e.g., idle instances, security groups) but does not offer granular, ML-based downsizing recommendations based on historical utilization data. Option C is wrong because AWS Cost Explorer focuses on visualizing and analyzing cost and usage trends, not on providing specific EC2 instance type recommendations for downsizing. Option D is wrong because AWS Budgets allows you to set cost thresholds and alerts, but it does not analyze historical utilization or generate downsizing recommendations.

52
MCQeasy

A company wants to receive alerts when its AWS costs exceed a certain threshold. Which AWS service should be used?

A.Amazon CloudWatch
B.AWS Cost Explorer
C.AWS Trusted Advisor
D.AWS Budgets
AnswerD

AWS Budgets lets you define a cost budget with a threshold and configure alerts that trigger when actual or forecast spend exceeds it, directly satisfying the requirement to be notified when costs cross a set limit. CloudWatch billing alarms alone cannot express budget thresholds.

Why this answer

AWS Budgets allows you to set custom cost and usage budgets and receive alerts when actual or forecasted costs exceed a defined threshold. It directly supports cost-based alerting with actions such as sending an SNS notification or applying an IAM policy to restrict resources when the budget limit is breached.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates confuse AWS Budgets with AWS Cost Explorer, assuming Cost Explorer can send alerts, when in fact Cost Explorer is only a reporting and analysis tool without native alerting capabilities.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Amazon CloudWatch monitors AWS resource utilization and application performance metrics, not cost thresholds; while it can trigger alarms on billing metrics if you enable detailed billing metrics, it is not the primary service for cost-based budget alerts. Option B is wrong because AWS Cost Explorer provides visualization and analysis of historical cost data but does not support proactive threshold-based alerts. Option C is wrong because AWS Trusted Advisor offers cost optimization recommendations and checks for idle resources, but it does not allow you to set custom cost thresholds or send alerts when costs exceed a specific amount.

53
MCQeasy

A company wants to monitor the performance of its Amazon RDS for MySQL database. The database is experiencing high CPU utilization during peak hours. The SysOps administrator needs to identify the queries causing the load. Which AWS service should be used?

A.Amazon RDS Performance Insights
B.AWS CloudTrail
C.Amazon Inspector
D.Amazon CloudWatch Logs
AnswerA

Amazon RDS Performance Insights is the correct choice because it is a database performance tuning and monitoring feature specifically designed for RDS. It provides an interactive dashboard that visualizes database load, waits, and identifies the top SQL queries consuming resources. With Performance Insights, you can quickly detect bottlenecks, analyze query performance, and troubleshoot issues in real time, making it directly relevant to monitoring database performance.

Why this answer

Amazon RDS Performance Insights provides a dashboard that visualizes database load and helps identify the queries causing high CPU usage. Option B is wrong because AWS CloudTrail records API activity, not database query performance data. Option C is wrong because Amazon Inspector is a vulnerability management service, not a database performance tool.

Option D is wrong because Amazon CloudWatch Logs collects log files but does not analyze query performance or CPU usage impact.

54
MCQhard

A SysOps administrator is troubleshooting high CPU utilization on an RDS for MySQL instance. The application is read-heavy. Which optimization technique would improve performance and potentially reduce costs?

A.Delete unused indexes from the database.
B.Implement RDS Read Replicas to offload read traffic.
C.Increase the allocated storage size.
D.Enable Multi-AZ deployment for failover support.
AnswerB

Implementing RDS Read Replicas is an effective solution for high CPU utilization when the workload is read-heavy. Replicas are asynchronous read-only copies of the primary instance, and routing SELECT traffic to them offloads query processing and reduces CPU spent on reads on the primary. The primary still handles writes and synchronized reads, but by scaling out read capacity you can prevent CPU saturation without upgrading the primary instance. This approach also delivers cost efficiency because you can choose smaller replicas or a smaller primary rather than purchasing a larger single instance.

Why this answer

Implementing RDS Read Replicas offloads read traffic from the primary instance to one or more replicas, reducing CPU utilization on the primary. This improves performance for read-heavy applications and can also reduce costs because you can potentially use a smaller primary instance or fewer replicas than scaling up the primary. Read Replicas are asynchronous and can be in different AZs or regions.

Exam trap

The trap is confusing Multi-AZ with Read Replicas. Multi-AZ is for high availability, not performance. Also, candidates might think increasing storage improves CPU, but it doesn't.

The key is to offload reads.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because deleting unused indexes might improve write performance but is unlikely to significantly reduce CPU for read-heavy workloads; indexes are crucial for read performance. Option C is wrong because increasing allocated storage size does not directly improve CPU performance; it may allow for more IOPS if using gp3, but it's not the primary optimization for CPU. Option D is wrong because Multi-AZ deployment provides high availability and failover, not performance improvement; the standby instance does not serve read traffic.

55
MCQeasy

A company uses Amazon S3 to store log files. The logs are accessed frequently for the first 30 days, then rarely accessed after that. The company must retain logs for 7 years for compliance. What is the MOST cost-effective storage solution?

A.Use S3 Standard for 30 days and then transition to S3 Glacier Deep Archive.
B.Use S3 Standard for 7 years.
C.Use S3 One Zone-IA for 30 days and then transition to S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval.
D.Use S3 Intelligent-Tiering for the entire 7 years.
AnswerA

This is optimal because an S3 Lifecycle rule can automatically transition objects from S3 Standard, which is used during the 30-day active period when logs are written and frequently queried, to S3 Glacier Deep Archive, the lowest-cost storage class. Deep Archive is designed for long-term retention of rarely accessed data, offering 99.999999999% durability and a default retrieval time of 12 hours, which is acceptable for 7-year-old logs. This combination minimizes storage spend over the retention period while keeping the logs recoverable for compliance purposes.

Why this answer

S3 Lifecycle policies can transition objects from S3 Standard to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days, minimizing costs while meeting compliance. S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval is more expensive than Deep Archive for long-term archival. S3 Intelligent-Tiering adds monitoring costs.

S3 One Zone-IA is not suitable for long-term archival due to lower durability.

56
MCQmedium

A company runs a batch processing job every night that takes 2 hours on a single m5.xlarge EC2 instance. The job is fault-tolerant and can be interrupted. The SysOps administrator wants to reduce costs. Which solution is MOST cost-effective?

A.Use an On-Demand instance and set up a CloudWatch alarm to stop it when the job completes.
B.Use a Spot Instance with a Spot Fleet that includes a fallback to On-Demand if Spot is not available.
C.Use a Dedicated Host to run the job.
D.Purchase a Reserved Instance for the m5.xlarge instance.
AnswerB

A Spot Fleet is the correct choice here because it lets you request Spot Instances at a significantly lower cost while maintaining reliability with an On-Demand fallback. The nightly batch job is fault-tolerant, meaning it can restart or rerun if Spot capacity is reclaimed. If Spot capacity is unavailable or gets interrupted, the Spot Fleet automatically launches an On-Demand instance to ensure the job still completes, giving you a balance of cost savings and capacity assurance.

Why this answer

The most cost-effective solution is to use a Spot Instance with a Spot Fleet that includes a fallback to On-Demand if Spot is not available (Option B). The job is fault-tolerant and can be interrupted, making it ideal for Spot Instances which offer significant cost savings (up to 90% compared to On-Demand). The Spot Fleet with an On-Demand fallback ensures the job completes even if Spot capacity is unavailable.

Option A (On-Demand with CloudWatch alarm) does not reduce costs since On-Demand is more expensive. Option C (Dedicated Host) is costly and unnecessary for a batch job. Option D (Reserved Instance) requires a 1- or 3-year commitment and is not cost-effective for a 2-hour daily job.

57
MCQeasy

A SysOps administrator is reviewing the monthly AWS bill and notices a significant cost for data transfer from EC2 to the internet. The EC2 instances are in a VPC and serve content to users. Which action would MOST effectively reduce data transfer costs?

A.Use VPC endpoints to connect to S3 and DynamoDB.
B.Use Amazon CloudFront as a content delivery network (CDN).
C.Move the EC2 instances to a different AWS Region with lower data transfer rates.
D.Use a NAT Gateway to route traffic through a single IP.
AnswerB

Amazon CloudFront serves as a content delivery network, caching responses at edge locations so repeat requests never reach the EC2 origin. This reduces the volume of data transferred directly from EC2 to the public internet and, for requests that do go to the origin, the AWS-to-CloudFront leg is free while CloudFront's egress rate is lower than EC2's standard internet data transfer rate. Offloading delivery to edge servers therefore both cuts total egress gigabytes and shifts remaining traffic to a cheaper pricing tier, directly lowering the monthly bill.

Why this answer

Using Amazon CloudFront as a CDN caches content at edge locations closer to users, reducing the amount of data transferred directly from EC2 instances to the internet. This lowers data transfer out (DTO) costs because CloudFront has lower data transfer rates and can also cache content, reducing the load on EC2. The question specifies data transfer from EC2 to the internet, so offloading to CloudFront is the most effective cost reduction.

Exam trap

The trap is confusing VPC endpoints with CDNs. VPC endpoints reduce costs for private traffic to AWS services, not for internet-facing traffic. Candidates might also think NAT Gateway reduces costs, but it actually adds data processing charges.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because VPC endpoints are for private connectivity to AWS services like S3 and DynamoDB, not for reducing internet data transfer from EC2 to users; they don't affect EC2-to-internet traffic. Option C is wrong because moving to a different region with lower data transfer rates is not a standard cost optimization strategy; AWS data transfer rates are generally consistent across regions, and moving regions introduces latency and complexity. Option D is wrong because a NAT Gateway is used for outbound internet access from private subnets, but it does not reduce data transfer costs; in fact, NAT Gateway data processing charges can increase costs.

58
MCQmedium

A company uses an Amazon DynamoDB table with provisioned capacity. The average write usage is 500 write capacity units (WCU) but regularly spikes to 2,000 WCU during business hours. The SysOps administrator wants to reduce costs without affecting performance during the spikes. Which solution should the administrator implement?

A.Enable DynamoDB auto scaling
B.Switch to DynamoDB on-demand capacity mode
C.Purchase reserved capacity for 2,000 WCU
D.Use DynamoDB Time to Live (TTL) to delete old items
AnswerA

DynamoDB auto scaling uses CloudWatch metrics (ConsumedWriteCapacityUnits and ConsumedReadCapacityUnits) to automatically adjust provisioned capacity between configured minimum and maximum limits. This handles predictable spikes by scaling up in advance and reduces costs by scaling down during low usage, eliminating manual intervention. With a target utilization set (e.g., 70%), auto scaling maintains enough capacity to handle demand while avoiding overprovisioning.

Why this answer

DynamoDB auto scaling allows the table to automatically adjust its provisioned write capacity between a minimum and maximum range based on actual traffic. By setting the minimum WCU to cover the average usage (500) and the maximum to handle the spikes (2,000), the administrator pays only for the baseline capacity most of the time, while the service scales up during spikes without manual intervention or over-provisioning.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse on-demand mode as a cost-saving measure for spiky workloads, but in reality, on-demand is more expensive than provisioned capacity with auto scaling when there is a predictable baseline, and the question specifically asks to reduce costs without affecting performance.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because switching to on-demand capacity mode would eliminate the need to manage capacity but would result in significantly higher costs for the described workload, as on-demand charges per write request are higher than provisioned capacity, especially when the baseline usage is predictable. Option C is wrong because purchasing reserved capacity for 2,000 WCU would lock the company into paying for that high capacity 24/7, even during off-peak hours when usage is only 500 WCU, leading to wasted expenditure. Option D is wrong because DynamoDB Time to Live (TTL) is a feature for automatically expiring and deleting old items to manage storage costs, not for handling write capacity spikes or optimizing provisioned throughput costs.

59
Multi-Selectmedium

A SysOps administrator is optimizing costs for an AWS account. The account has multiple EC2 instances running 24/7 with varying utilization. Which TWO actions will help reduce costs without impacting performance? (Choose TWO.)

Select 2 answers
A.Use AWS Compute Optimizer to right-size instances.
B.Use larger instance types to improve performance.
C.Enable detailed CloudWatch monitoring for all instances.
D.Enable termination protection on all instances.
E.Purchase Reserved Instances for instances that run consistently.
AnswersA, E

AWS Compute Optimizer is a machine-learning-based service that analyzes your instance utilization (CPU, memory, network, and disk) over the previous 14 days or longer, and generates right-sizing recommendations that match instance type and size to actual workload requirements. By migrating to recommended smaller or more modern instance families, you eliminate over-provisioning and reduce monthly EC2 costs without degrading application performance, making it a direct and effective cost-optimization action.

Why this answer

AWS Compute Optimizer analyzes historical utilization metrics (CPU, memory, network, etc.) and provides right-sizing recommendations to match instance types to actual workload demands. By downsizing over-provisioned instances, you reduce costs without degrading performance, as the new instance type still meets the workload's peak requirements.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing operational safeguards (like termination protection or monitoring) with cost optimization actions, leading candidates to select options that add cost or provide no savings.

60
MCQmedium

A SysOps administrator needs to reduce costs for a fleet of EC2 instances that run a stateless web application. The instances are currently On-Demand. The workload runs 24/7 for the next 12 months. Which pricing model provides the greatest cost savings?

A.Use Dedicated Hosts.
B.Use Spot Instances.
C.Purchase Standard Reserved Instances for a 1-year term.
D.Purchase Convertible Reserved Instances for a 1-year term.
AnswerC

Standard Reserved Instances for a 1-year term are the most cost-effective choice for a predictable, always-on fleet because they apply a significant hourly discount (up to 40% relative to On-Demand) while requiring no management overhead. By committing to a 1-year term with an All Upfront or Partial Upfront payment, you lock in that discounted rate for the entire year, directly reducing costs for steady-state usage without sacrificing reliability or capacity. This makes them the correct answer for an administrator tasked with trimming costs on a non-interruptible workload.

Why this answer

Standard Reserved Instances (RIs) for a 1-year term provide a significant discount (up to 40%) over On-Demand pricing for workloads that run continuously 24/7. Since this stateless web application runs constantly for the next 12 months, Standard RIs offer the greatest cost savings among the options, as they are designed for steady-state usage and do not require flexibility in instance family or operating system.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose Spot Instances (Option B) thinking they are always cheaper, but they overlook the requirement for 24/7 availability and the risk of interruption, which makes them unsuitable for a stateless web application that must run continuously without disruption.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Dedicated Hosts are a physical server dedicated to your use, which incurs additional costs (per-host billing) and does not provide the same discount level as Reserved Instances; they are used for licensing or compliance requirements, not cost savings for a stateless web app. Option B is wrong because Spot Instances can be interrupted with a 2-minute warning, making them unsuitable for a 24/7 stateless web application that requires constant availability; they are designed for fault-tolerant or batch workloads, not always-on production traffic. Option D is wrong because Convertible Reserved Instances offer flexibility to change instance attributes (family, OS, tenancy) but have a lower discount (typically 10-20% less than Standard RIs) for the same 1-year term, making them less cost-effective for a fixed, predictable workload.

61
MCQeasy

A company stores large volumes of log data in Amazon S3. The logs are accessed frequently for the first 30 days, then occasionally for the next 60 days, and after 90 days they are rarely accessed but must be retained for 7 years for compliance. The SysOps administrator wants to minimize storage costs while ensuring data is available when needed. Which S3 lifecycle policy configuration should be applied?

A.Transition objects to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days, and to S3 Glacier after 60 days. Delete after 7 years.
B.Transition objects to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days, and delete after 7 years.
C.Transition objects to S3 One Zone-IA after 30 days, and to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days. Delete after 7 years.
D.Transition objects to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days, and to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days. Delete after 7 years.
AnswerD

This lifecycle policy matches the access patterns: frequent access -> Standard-IA after 30 days, occasional access for next 60 days (still in IA), then rarely accessed -> Deep Archive after 90 days. Deep Archive is the lowest-cost storage option for long-term retention. Deleting after 7 years meets compliance. This is the most cost-effective configuration.

Why this answer

It aligns the lifecycle transitions with the access patterns: frequent access for the first 30 days (S3 Standard), occasional access for the next 60 days (S3 Standard-IA), and rare access after 90 days (S3 Glacier Deep Archive, the lowest-cost storage class for long-term retention). The deletion after 7 years meets compliance requirements while minimizing costs by using progressively cheaper storage classes.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may choose Option A because they think S3 Glacier is the standard archival tier, but they overlook that S3 Glacier Deep Archive is cheaper for 7-year retention and that the occasional-access period (days 31–90) is better served by S3 Standard-IA, not S3 Glacier.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because transitioning to S3 Glacier after 60 days (instead of 90) would incur unnecessary retrieval costs and slower access during the occasional-access period (days 31–90), and S3 Glacier is more expensive than S3 Glacier Deep Archive for long-term retention. Option B is wrong because moving directly to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 30 days ignores the frequent-access period, causing high retrieval costs and latency for logs that are still accessed often. Option C is wrong because S3 One Zone-IA is not resilient to AZ failures and is unsuitable for compliance data that must be retained for 7 years; also, transitioning after 30 days to One Zone-IA does not match the occasional-access pattern (days 31–90) as well as Standard-IA.

62
MCQhard

A company runs a production Amazon DynamoDB table with provisioned capacity of 1000 write capacity units (WCU). The table experiences unpredictable spikes up to 2000 WCU, causing throttling. The SysOps administrator wants to minimize cost while handling the spikes. Which solution should be used?

A.Switch to on-demand capacity mode.
B.Increase provisioned WCU to 2000 to cover the peak.
C.Enable DynamoDB Auto Scaling with minimum 1000, maximum 2000 WCU.
D.Use a DynamoDB Accelerator (DAX) cache.
AnswerA

Switch to on-demand capacity mode: On-demand mode instantly accommodates usage spikes without requiring capacity planning or pre-provisioning. You pay per request, so there is no charge for unused provisioned capacity, making it highly cost-effective for unpredictable write traffic. It eliminates throttling errors because DynamoDB automatically scales write and read capacity to match your application's actual demand, even during sudden bursts.

Why this answer

Switching to on-demand capacity mode eliminates throttling during unpredictable spikes by automatically scaling write capacity up to the required 2000 WCU without any manual intervention or pre-provisioning. This minimizes cost because you pay only for the actual reads and writes consumed, avoiding the fixed cost of over-provisioning for peak capacity that may be rarely used.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose DynamoDB Auto Scaling (Option C) thinking it handles spikes instantly, but they overlook the inherent scaling delay and the fact that it still requires a maximum capacity setting that may not cover sudden bursts, leading to throttling.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because increasing provisioned WCU to 2000 permanently incurs higher base costs even during low-traffic periods, which contradicts the goal of minimizing cost. Option C is wrong because DynamoDB Auto Scaling adjusts capacity based on utilization metrics, but it cannot react instantly to sudden spikes up to 2000 WCU, leading to throttling during the scaling delay. Option D is wrong because DynamoDB Accelerator (DAX) is an in-memory cache that improves read performance, not write capacity, and does not address write throttling caused by insufficient WCU.

63
Multi-Selecteasy

A company wants to monitor the performance of its application running on EC2. Which TWO metrics should be monitored to detect performance bottlenecks? (Choose TWO.)

Select 2 answers
A.Network Packets In
B.CPU Utilization
C.Status Check Failed
D.Disk Space Utilization
E.Memory Utilization
AnswersB, E

CPU Utilization is a fundamental performance metric that shows the percentage of allocated EC2 compute capacity being consumed. Prolonged high CPU utilization indicates the application is compute-bound and may be reaching its processing limits, causing higher latency and reduced throughput. CloudWatch provides this metric by default, enabling quick identification of CPU bottlenecks. Setting alarms on CPU Utilization helps trigger scaling actions or performance tuning.

Why this answer

To detect performance bottlenecks on EC2, you should monitor CPU Utilization (B) and Memory Utilization (E). High CPU utilization indicates CPU-bound issues, while high memory utilization can cause swapping and degrade performance. Network Packets In (A) is a network metric but not typically a direct performance bottleneck indicator.

Status Check Failed (C) is for instance health, not performance. Disk Space Utilization (D) is a storage capacity metric, not a performance metric, and is not available by default (requires custom scripts).

64
MCQmedium

A company has an EC2-based application that runs at inconsistent times. The workloads are fault-tolerant and can be interrupted. Which purchasing option provides the most cost savings?

A.Reserved Instances
B.On-Demand Instances
C.Dedicated Hosts
D.Spot Instances
AnswerD

Spot Instances make unused EC2 capacity available at discounts of up to 90% compared to On-Demand prices, making them the cheapest option for fault-tolerant, stateless, or interruptible workloads. Because the workload is inconsistent and can accept interruptions, Spot's main risk (instances being reclaimed with a two-minute warning when EC2 needs capacity back) is not a blocker. You can launch and terminate Spot Instances elastically to match demand, and even use Spot Fleet triggers to replace reclaimed capacity, giving massive cost savings for this use case.

Why this answer

Spot Instances. Spot Instances offer the largest discount (up to 90%) for workloads that are fault-tolerant and can be interrupted. Reserved Instances (A) require a 1- or 3-year commitment and are best for steady-state workloads.

On-Demand Instances (B) provide no discount. Dedicated Hosts (C) are expensive and designed for specific licensing or compliance requirements, not cost savings.

65
MCQhard

A company uses AWS Lambda functions to process messages from an SQS queue. The Lambda function is configured with a reserved concurrency of 100. The SQS queue receives unpredictable spikes of up to 10,000 messages per second. The function takes about 1 second to process a message. The SysOps team notices that during spikes, messages are being throttled and appear in the DLQ. How can the team resolve this while optimizing cost?

A.Reduce the reserved concurrency to 10 to force the function to process messages more slowly.
B.Increase reserved concurrency to 1000 and enable batch processing with a batch size of 10 in the SQS event source mapping.
C.Provision an EC2 fleet to poll the SQS queue and invoke the Lambda function.
D.Increase the Lambda function memory and timeout to use a larger instance type.
AnswerB

Increasing reserved concurrency to 1000 allows AWS Lambda to scale out to handle a high volume of SQS messages without throttling, as the event source mapping automatically exercises up to that concurrency. Setting a batch size of 10 instructs the SQS event source to deliver up to 10 records per Lambda invocation, reducing the total number of invocations and overhead while dramatically improving throughput. This is the recommended pattern for processing large SQS workloads in a serverless architecture.

Why this answer

Increasing reserved concurrency to 1000 allows the Lambda function to scale to handle the spike of 10,000 messages per second, and enabling batch processing with a batch size of 10 reduces the number of invocations, which optimizes cost by processing up to 10 messages per invocation instead of one. Option A is wrong because reducing reserved concurrency would throttle even more messages, increasing DLQ traffic. Option C is wrong because using EC2 adds operational overhead and does not leverage Lambda's serverless scaling, increasing complexity and cost.

Option D is wrong because Lambda does not use instance types; memory and timeout adjustments do not directly address concurrency limitations or batch processing.

66
MCQhard

A company is running a critical application on Amazon RDS for MySQL. The database is experiencing high read traffic, causing performance issues. The SysOps administrator needs to improve read performance while keeping costs low. Which solution should the administrator choose?

A.Enable Multi-AZ deployment
B.Increase the DB instance class to a larger size
C.Use Amazon ElastiCache to cache read results
D.Add one or more Read Replicas in the same Region
AnswerD

Adding one or more Read Replicas in the same Region creates independent, actively readable database copies that serve SELECT traffic, leaving the primary free to handle writes. Because the replicas stay in the same Region, you avoid inter-Region data transfer charges, and you can select smaller instance classes for the replicas to closely match the read-only workload. This horizontal scaling approach is cost-efficient because you add capacity only for the traffic that needs it, and it also preserves the primary's performance for the write-heavy portion of the workload.

Why this answer

Adding one or more Read Replicas in the same Region offloads read traffic from the primary RDS instance by directing SELECT queries to the replicas, which are asynchronous copies of the primary. This directly addresses high read traffic without incurring the cost of a larger instance or the complexity of caching, making it the most cost-effective solution for read scaling.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing Multi-AZ (high availability) with read scaling, leading candidates to select Option A, which does not improve read performance because the standby replica is not accessible for reads.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Multi-AZ deployment provides high availability and automatic failover, not read scaling; the standby replica cannot serve read traffic. Option B is wrong because increasing the DB instance class improves both read and write performance but is more expensive than adding Read Replicas, which scale reads horizontally at lower cost. Option C is wrong because while ElastiCache can cache read results, it requires additional infrastructure, application code changes, and cache invalidation logic, making it less straightforward and potentially more costly than Read Replicas for this specific database read workload.

67
MCQmedium

A SysOps team is using CloudWatch to monitor CPU utilization of EC2 instances. They want to receive a notification when average CPU exceeds 80% for 5 consecutive minutes. Which combination of services should they use?

A.CloudWatch Metrics, CloudWatch Alarm, and AWS Lambda
B.AWS Config, CloudWatch Alarm, and Amazon SNS
C.CloudWatch Metrics, CloudWatch Alarm, and Amazon SNS
D.CloudWatch Logs, CloudWatch Alarm, and AWS Lambda
AnswerC

Amazon EC2 automatically publishes CPUUtilization to the AWS/EC2 namespace in CloudWatch Metrics, providing the data source for evaluation. A CloudWatch Alarm continuously compares the metric against a threshold over a specified period and transitions between OK, ALARM, and INSUFFICIENT_DATA states. When the alarm enters ALARM, it invokes an action that publishes a message to an Amazon SNS topic, which then delivers notifications through endpoints such as email, SMS, or HTTP. This is the standard, minimal pattern for metric-based alerting.

Why this answer

CloudWatch Metrics collects the CPU utilization data from EC2 instances, a CloudWatch Alarm evaluates whether the average CPU exceeds 80% for 5 consecutive minutes (using a period of 300 seconds and 5 datapoints), and Amazon SNS publishes the notification to subscribers (e.g., email, SMS) when the alarm state transitions to ALARM. This combination directly fulfills the requirement without unnecessary services.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse CloudWatch Logs with CloudWatch Metrics, assuming logs can be used for metric-based alarms, or they overcomplicate the solution by adding Lambda when SNS alone is sufficient for notification.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because AWS Lambda is not required for simple alarm-based notifications; SNS alone handles the notification, and adding Lambda introduces unnecessary complexity and cost. Option B is wrong because AWS Config is a configuration auditing and compliance service, not a monitoring or metric collection service; it cannot provide CPU utilization metrics. Option D is wrong because CloudWatch Logs is for storing and analyzing log data, not for collecting or evaluating CPU utilization metrics; CPU utilization is a metric, not a log event.

68
MCQeasy

A SysOps administrator manages a web application running on Amazon EC2 instances that run 24/7 for the next 12 months. The workload is steady and predictable. Which EC2 purchasing option provides the highest cost savings for this use case?

A.Standard Reserved Instances
B.Spot Instances
C.On-Demand Instances
D.Savings Plans (Compute)
AnswerA

Standard Reserved Instances are ideal for a steady, predictable 24/7 workload because they offer the deepest discount, up to 72% compared to On-Demand, when you commit to a 1-year or 3-year term. You can choose All Upfront, Partial Upfront, or No Upfront payment options, which further optimize cash flow while locking in the lowest hourly rate for a specific instance family and region. For a workload that runs continuously without interruption, this commitment maximizes cost savings while guaranteeing capacity, making it the most economical choice.

Why this answer

Standard Reserved Instances provide the highest cost savings for a steady, predictable 24/7 workload over a 12-month period because they offer a significant discount (up to 72% compared to On-Demand) in exchange for a commitment to a specific instance family, region, and term length. Since the workload runs continuously without interruption, the upfront payment or partial upfront payment for a 1-year term maximizes savings without the risk of interruption or the need for flexibility.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose Savings Plans (Compute) because they offer flexibility across instance families, but for a predictable, steady-state workload with a fixed instance type, Standard Reserved Instances provide the highest discount and capacity guarantee, making them the optimal choice for cost savings.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because Spot Instances are designed for fault-tolerant, flexible workloads that can handle interruptions, not for a steady 24/7 production web application that requires reliability. Option C is wrong because On-Demand Instances offer no upfront commitment but have the highest per-hour cost, making them the least cost-effective for a predictable, always-on workload. Option D is wrong because Savings Plans (Compute) provide flexibility across instance families and regions but typically offer slightly lower discounts than Standard Reserved Instances for a specific, steady-state workload with a known instance type and region.

69
MCQeasy

A SysOps administrator wants to monitor the cost of EC2 instances. Which AWS service should be used to visualize and track costs over time?

A.AWS CloudWatch
B.AWS Budgets
C.AWS Trusted Advisor
D.AWS Cost Explorer
AnswerD

Cost Explorer is the native AWS service for visualizing, understanding, and analyzing your costs and usage over time. It provides an interactive graph of daily, monthly, or yearly spend, with the ability to filter by EC2-specific attributes like instance type, purchase option (On-Demand, Reserved, Spot), or custom tags. This makes it the correct tool for monitoring EC2 cost trends, predicting future spending, and identifying what is driving your bill.

Why this answer

AWS Cost Explorer is the dedicated cost management tool that provides visualization of historical and forecasted AWS spending, including EC2 costs, through graphs, filters, and grouping by service, tag, or linked account. It ingests the Cost and Usage Report data and lets administrators track spend trends over time, which is exactly what the question asks for.

Exam trap

SOA-C02 often tests the confusion between CloudWatch (operational monitoring) and Cost Explorer (cost visualization), and between Budgets (threshold alerts) and Cost Explorer (trend analysis).

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because AWS CloudWatch monitors operational metrics (CPU, network, logs) and billing alarms, but it does not provide cost visualization or historical cost trend analysis. Option B is wrong because AWS Budgets is used to set thresholds and receive alerts when costs or usage exceed a defined limit — it does not visualize or track cost trends over time. Option C is wrong because AWS Trusted Advisor provides best-practice recommendations across cost optimization, security, fault tolerance, and service limits, but it does not offer cost visualization or time-series cost tracking.

70
MCQmedium

A SysOps administrator manages a fleet of Amazon EC2 instances. The administrator needs to identify underutilized instances and receive recommendations for instance type changes to reduce costs. Which AWS service should be used to provide these rightsizing recommendations?

A.AWS Cost Explorer
B.AWS Trusted Advisor
C.AWS Compute Optimizer
D.Amazon CloudWatch Dashboard
AnswerC

AWS Compute Optimizer uses machine learning to analyze historical utilization metrics — including CPU, memory, EBS volume I/O, and network throughput — over a 14-day period and delivers specific recommendations for right-sizing EC2 instances, Auto Scaling groups, and EBS volumes. It provides a projected monthly cost savings estimate and a performance risk score for each recommendation, helping you balance cost and performance. You can also enable enhanced infrastructure metrics for even more precise suggestions, making it the appropriate tool for rightsizing EC2 instances.

Why this answer

AWS Compute Optimizer is the correct service because it uses machine learning to analyze historical utilization metrics (CPU, memory, network, and storage) of EC2 instances and generates rightsizing recommendations, including instance type changes, to reduce costs and improve performance. It directly addresses the need to identify underutilized instances and provide actionable recommendations for cost optimization.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse AWS Compute Optimizer with AWS Trusted Advisor, because both offer cost optimization checks, but Compute Optimizer is the only service that provides detailed, ML-driven rightsizing recommendations for EC2 instance types based on historical utilization data.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because AWS Cost Explorer provides cost and usage data visualization and forecasting, but it does not analyze instance utilization metrics or generate specific rightsizing recommendations for EC2 instance types. Option B is wrong because AWS Trusted Advisor offers general best-practice checks, including cost optimization, but its EC2-specific recommendations are limited to idle instances and reserved instance utilization, not detailed rightsizing recommendations based on historical utilization patterns. Option D is wrong because Amazon CloudWatch Dashboard is a monitoring and visualization tool for metrics and logs, but it does not automatically analyze utilization data to produce instance type change recommendations; it requires manual setup and interpretation.

71
MCQmedium

A company runs a web application on EC2 instances behind an ALB. They want to optimize costs for variable traffic patterns while maintaining high availability. Which solution is MOST cost-effective?

A.Use Dedicated Hosts to run the application and share resources across multiple accounts.
B.Use a mix of On-Demand and Spot Instances in an Auto Scaling group with a target tracking scaling policy.
C.Purchase Reserved Instances for the expected baseline capacity and use On-Demand for spikes.
D.Use only On-Demand EC2 Instances with an Auto Scaling group to handle variable traffic.
AnswerB

A mixed-instance Auto Scaling group with On-Demand and Spot Instances is cost-optimal because Spot Instances are available for up to 90% lower hourly price, and the target tracking scaling policy automatically adjusts the desired capacity based on a selected metric such as average CPU utilization, maintaining a baseline with On-Demand while absorbing traffic spikes with Spot. The ASG's capacity rebalancing feature monitors Spot interruption warnings and proactively launches replacement instances, making this an ideal, resilient and inexpensive solution for a fault-tolerant web tier.

Why this answer

The most cost-effective because it combines On-Demand Instances for baseline capacity and Spot Instances for burstable traffic, leveraging lower Spot prices while maintaining high availability through Auto Scaling with a target tracking policy. Option A is wrong because Dedicated Hosts are expensive and provide no cost benefit for variable traffic. Option C is wrong because Reserved Instances require a 1- or 3-year commitment and are not suitable for variable traffic; they are better for steady-state workloads.

Option D is wrong because using only On-Demand Instances is more expensive than using a mix that includes Spot Instances.

72
MCQeasy

A company runs a web application on EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer. The application experiences variable traffic patterns. What is the MOST cost-effective way to ensure the application scales based on demand?

A.Provision a fixed number of EC2 instances that can handle peak load at all times.
B.Use EC2 Auto Scaling with a scheduled scaling policy that adds instances during business hours.
C.Use EC2 Auto Scaling with a target tracking scaling policy based on average CPU utilization.
D.Use EC2 Auto Scaling with a manual scaling plan that requires an administrator to adjust the desired capacity.
AnswerC

A target tracking scaling policy works by setting a target value for a metric—such as average CPU utilization at, say, 60%—and Auto Scaling continuously reads CloudWatch alarms to add or remove instances, keeping the metric near that target. This approach is reactive and automatic, handling sudden traffic surges by launching instances and terminating idle ones when demand falls. It is the most cost-effective and hands-off option for variable web workloads.

Why this answer

A target tracking scaling policy based on average CPU utilization automatically adjusts the number of EC2 instances to maintain a target metric (e.g., 50% CPU), scaling out during high demand and scaling in during low demand. This is the most cost-effective approach for variable traffic patterns as it eliminates over-provisioning and manual intervention, directly aligning capacity with real-time demand.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often choose scheduled scaling (Option B) thinking it covers all variable traffic, but the exam tests the distinction that scheduled scaling only works for predictable patterns, not truly variable demand, making target tracking the correct choice for cost-effective dynamic scaling.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because provisioning a fixed number of EC2 instances for peak load results in significant over-provisioning and wasted cost during low-traffic periods, as instances remain running idle. Option B is wrong because a scheduled scaling policy only adds instances during predefined business hours, which cannot handle unpredictable or variable traffic patterns outside those hours, leading to either under-provisioning or over-provisioning. Option D is wrong because a manual scaling plan requires an administrator to adjust desired capacity, which is not cost-effective due to delayed response times and the risk of human error, failing to scale dynamically with demand.

73
Multi-Selectmedium

A company is running a production web application on EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer. The company wants to optimize costs without sacrificing performance. Which TWO actions should the SysOps administrator take?

Select 2 answers
A.Purchase Reserved Instances for the baseline capacity.
B.Use Dedicated Hosts for all instances to control placement.
C.Implement Auto Scaling to match capacity with demand.
D.Enable T2/T3 unlimited to handle spikes without throttling.
E.Use multiple instance types in each Availability Zone.
AnswersA, C

Reserved Instances provide a significant hourly cost reduction over On-Demand pricing in exchange for a one- or three-year commitment, directly addressing the stem’s requirement to optimise costs. By purchasing Reserved Instances for the baseline capacity—the minimum number of instances always running—the company locks in lower rates for that steady-state workload while retaining On-Demand or Spot instances to handle any variable traffic spikes, thus preserving performance.

Why this answer

(Reserved Instances) provides a significant discount for steady-state workloads, and Option C (Auto Scaling) ensures capacity matches demand, preventing over-provisioning. Option B (Dedicated Hosts) is more expensive and unnecessary. Option D (T3 unlimited) could cause unexpected costs if credits exhausted.

Option E (Multiple instance types per AZ) is not a cost optimization.

74
Multi-Selecthard

Which TWO configurations can improve the performance of an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL database that is experiencing high read latency? (Choose TWO.)

Select 2 answers
A.Upgrade to a larger instance size.
B.Enable provisioned IOPS on the DB instance.
C.Create a read replica in the same AWS Region.
D.Enable Multi-AZ deployment.
E.Enable storage auto-scaling.
AnswersB, C

Enabling provisioned IOPS on the DB instance creates an io1/io2 storage volume with a fixed, predictable IOPS level, decoupling performance from burst balances. This gives consistent low-latency I/O for transactional workloads and avoids the variability of general-purpose SSD when sustained throughput is required. It directly addresses storage I/O performance, making it a correct configuration choice.

Why this answer

Enabling Provisioned IOPS on an Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL database provides consistent and predictable I/O performance, which directly reduces read latency by ensuring sufficient IOPS for read-intensive workloads. Option C is correct because creating a read replica offloads read traffic from the primary DB instance to the replica, reducing contention and improving read latency for the primary instance.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often confuse Multi-AZ deployment with read replicas, mistakenly thinking Multi-AZ improves read performance, when in fact the standby in Multi-AZ is not accessible for reads and only provides failover redundancy.

75
Multi-Selecthard

An application writes logs to an S3 bucket. The logs are accessed frequently for the first 30 days, then rarely after that, but must be retained for 7 years. Which THREE steps should be taken to optimize cost? (Choose three.)

Select 3 answers
A.Use an S3 Lifecycle policy to transition objects to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days.
B.Use an S3 Lifecycle policy to transition objects to S3 Standard-IA after 30 days.
C.Delete logs older than 30 days.
D.Set an S3 Lifecycle policy to expire objects after 7 years.
E.Use S3 Intelligent-Tiering to automatically optimize costs.
AnswersA, B, D

Transitioning objects to S3 Glacier Deep Archive after 90 days is correct because it directly addresses the long-term retention requirement while minimizing storage costs. After 90 days, the logs are almost never accessed, so the multi-hour retrieval time of Deep Archive is an acceptable trade-off for its extremely low per-GB price. Lifecycle policies can automatically move objects between storage classes based on age, and Glacier Deep Archive is the cheapest option for data that must be kept for years. This approach preserves the logs for compliance while using the most cost-effective storage class available.

Why this answer

S3 Glacier Deep Archive is the lowest-cost storage class for long-term archival data, making it ideal for logs that are rarely accessed after 90 days. An S3 Lifecycle policy automates the transition from a higher-cost class (e.g., Standard-IA) to Glacier Deep Archive, reducing storage costs while retaining the data for the required 7-year period.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may choose S3 Intelligent-Tiering (option E) thinking it automatically handles all cost optimization, but it does not support transitions to Glacier Deep Archive and incurs per-object monitoring fees, making it unsuitable for this long-term archival scenario.

Page 1 of 2 · 141 questions totalNext →

Ready to test yourself?

Try a timed practice session using only Cost and Performance Optimization questions.