Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST administrative overhead?

By:
On:
In: SAA-C03
Tagged:
With: 0 Comments
A company runs an application on AWS.The application receives inconsistent amounts of usage.The application uses AWS Direct Connect to connect to an on-premises MySQL-compatible database.The on-premises database consistently uses a minimum of 2 GiB of memory.The company wants to migrate the on-premises database to a managed AWS service.The company wants to use auto scaling capabilities to manage unexpected workload increases.

Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST administrative overhead?

Provision an Amazon DynamoDB database with default read and write capacity settings.

Provision an Amazon Aurora database with a minimum capacity of 1 Aurora capacity unit (ACU).

Provision an Amazon Aurora Serverless v2 database with a minimum capacity of 1 Aurora capacity unit (ACU).

Provision an Amazon RDS for MySQL database with 2 GiB of memory.

Explanations:

Amazon DynamoDB is a NoSQL database and is not MySQL-compatible, which does not meet the company’s requirement for a MySQL-compatible database.

Amazon Aurora with provisioned capacity does not offer the automatic scaling required to handle fluctuating workloads, and would require manual intervention to adjust capacity.

Amazon Aurora Serverless v2 is MySQL-compatible, provides automatic scaling with Aurora Capacity Units (ACUs), and is suitable for handling variable workloads with minimal administrative overhead.

Amazon RDS for MySQL with a fixed capacity of 2 GiB would not offer automatic scaling capabilities to manage sudden workload increases.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

17 + eleven =