A financial services company must comply with strict data residency regulations. They want to run sensitive workloads on-premises while using Google Cloud for burst analytics. Which deployment model should they choose?
Hybrid cloud is the correct choice because it allows the financial services company to store sensitive regulated data on-premises, satisfying strict data residency requirements, while still leveraging public cloud resources for burst analytics and compute-intensive workloads. This architecture keeps the data within approved jurisdictions and uses the cloud only for processing, ensuring both compliance and scalability.
Why this answer
Hybrid cloud is correct because it combines on-premises infrastructure with public cloud services, allowing the company to keep regulated sensitive workloads on-premises (satisfying data residency) while leveraging Google Cloud for elastic burst analytics. This split-deployment model is the defining characteristic of hybrid cloud. Neither pure public nor pure private cloud alone satisfies both requirements.
Exam trap
The trap here is confusing 'multi-cloud' with 'hybrid cloud' — candidates see 'Google Cloud plus another environment' and pick multi-cloud, but multi-cloud specifically means multiple public providers, not on-prem plus public.
How to eliminate wrong answers
Option B is wrong because public cloud places all workloads in a provider's environment, which violates the data residency requirement for sensitive workloads. Option C is wrong because private cloud keeps everything on dedicated infrastructure and provides no native path to burst into Google Cloud's elastic capacity. Option D is wrong because multi-cloud means using two or more public cloud providers (e.g., GCP and AWS), which does not address the on-premises residency requirement at all.