CV0-004 Cloud Architecture and Design Practice Question
An e-commerce application experiences variable traffic with sudden spikes during flash sales. The application is designed to be stateless. Which scaling approach should the cloud architect implement to handle these spikes efficiently?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap is assuming that vertical scaling or fixed clusters can handle sudden spikes; candidates must recognize that only horizontal auto-scaling provides elastic capacity for variable traffic.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Horizontal auto-scaling based on CPU utilization
Horizontal auto-scaling based on CPU utilization allows the application to dynamically add or remove instances in response to traffic spikes. Since the application is stateless, new instances can be added seamlessly behind a load balancer, providing efficient scaling during flash sales.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Vertical scaling on a single large instance
Why it's wrong here
Vertical scaling enlarges one instance, capped by host size and requiring downtime to resize, so it cannot absorb sudden spikes. It suits steadily growing single-node workloads. The stateless application instead needs horizontal auto-scaling, adding instances in parallel as traffic rises.
- ✓
Horizontal auto-scaling based on CPU utilization
Why this is correct
Horizontal auto-scaling adds or removes stateless instances in response to CPU thresholds, matching capacity to flash-sale demand without manual intervention. Because the application holds no session state, new instances can serve traffic immediately, satisfying the sudden-spike constraint efficiently. Vertical scaling would require restarts and hit fixed instance-size ceilings.
- ✗
Using a load balancer with active-passive failover
Why it's wrong here
Active-passive failover maintains a standby for availability, not throughput; it does not add capacity as demand rises during flash sales. Load balancing across a fixed pool suits resilience against instance failure. The stateless design instead requires horizontal auto-scaling of the instance pool.
- ✗
Pre-provisioning a fixed cluster of instances
Why it's wrong here
Fixed pre-provisioning cannot track flash-sale spikes: capacity stays constant while demand surges, so instances saturate or sit idle between events. It suits predictable, steady workloads with committed utilisation. Horizontal auto-scaling, adding instances on demand, matches the stateless design.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every CV0-004 question from scratch — 834 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official CompTIA exam blueprint
This CV0-004 practice question is part of Courseiva's free CompTIA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CV0-004 exam.