SAP-C02 Exam - Question 7

Question

A company is running a traditional web application on Amazon EC2 instances. The company needs to refactor the application as microservices that run on containers. Separate versions of the application exist in two distinct environments: production and testing. Load for the application is variable, but the minimum load and the maximum load are known. A solutions architect needs to design the updated application with a serverless architecture that minimizes operational complexity.

Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?

Examice · Accepted Answer

To design a cost-effective serverless architecture that minimizes operational complexity while refactoring a traditional web application as microservices, using Amazon Elastic Container Service (ECS) with the Fargate launch type is a suitable solution. ECS with Fargate allows automatic scaling of containers based on the load, which handles the variable workload effectively. By uploading the container images to Amazon Elastic Container Registry (ECR) and deploying tasks from these images, the operational management is streamlined. Configuring two auto-scaled ECS clusters ensures separate environments for production and testing. Additionally, using Application Load Balancers to direct traffic to the ECS clusters aids in efficiently distributing the load. This solution fully leverages AWS managed services, reducing the overall operational burden and cost.

masetromain · Answer

B. Upload the container images to Amazon Elastic Container Registry (Amazon ECR). Configure two auto scaled Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) clusters with the Fargate launch type to handle the expected load. Deploy tasks from the ECR images. Configure two separate Application Load Balancers to direct traffic to the ECS clusters.
This option meets the requirement of using a serverless architecture by utilizing the Fargate launch type for the ECS clusters, which allows for automatic scaling of the containers based on the expected load. It also allows for separate deployments for production and testing by configuring separate ECS clusters and Application Load Balancers for each environment. This option also minimizes operational complexity by utilizing ECS and Fargate for the container orchestration and scaling.

zhangyu20000 · Answer

Answer is A. ABC all works but A is most COST EFFECTIVE

atirado · Answer

Option A - This option might not work. AWS Lambda provides a cheap option to run containers however nothing is said about execution times could be a concern, i.e. AWS Lambda only provides 15 minutes of execution time

Option B - This option will work. ALB, ECR, ECS and Fargate in combination will deliver a running solution.

Option C - This option will work. ALB, ECR, EKS and Fargate will deliver a running solution.

Option D - This option will work: Beanstalk will rely on ECS to run the containers. See https://docs.aws.amazon.com/elasticbeanstalk/latest/dg/create_deploy_docker_ecs.html

Cheapest option is B.

task_7 · Answer

I would go with d
a serverless architecture that minimizes operational complexity.

ansgohar · Answer

B. Image on ECR and ECS cost effective over EKS.

ninomfr64 · Answer

Not A. as Lambda is not good for running a "traditional web application", also you can use container with Lambda but ECS is "ideal for organizations that want a simple and cost-effective way to deploy and manage containerized applications"
Not C. as there is o pointer to EKS (e.g. open-source, industry standard, etc.) and also ECS is "ideal for organizations that want a simple and cost-effective way to deploy and manage containerized applications"
Not D. as Beanstalk is not serverless

Hence B.

career360guru · Answer

B is right option.
A is possible but Lambda container images has 10GB size limitation and requires you to keep updating these container images as customer re-factors the code. I feel A will have higher operational overhead. B is best option that will be most cost effective and operationally efficient.

cheese929 · Answer

B is correct.

hui521 · Answer

anyone helps to explain why D is not correct?

severlight · Answer

B. Not D as Beanstalk isn't serverless. Not C because there are no pointers to use EKS. Not A, because microservices are requested.

liux99 · Answer

The confusion here is choice between B and C. Both ECS and EKS are container orchestration service which supports fargate. But ECS is aws fully managed, better suited for simple application and also more cost effective.

_Jassybanga_ · Answer

D - because BCD are right solution , D because - beanstalk runs ECS in backend + Reduce operation complexity which is asked in the question

MoT0ne · Answer

AWS Elastic Beanstalk is not considered a serverless architecture. While it abstracts away some of the underlying infrastructure management, it still involves running and managing EC2 instances, which are virtual servers.

TonytheTiger · Answer

Option B and NOT Option C: I wasn't able to find a good comparison btw AWS ECS vs AWS EKS pricing in AWS documentation however I found  a few articles saying that AWS EKS has additional cost for using EKS control plane. I will leave it up to you to decide.

https://www.densify.com/eks-best-practices/aws-ecs-vs-eks/

Wuhao · Answer

Once choose eks,do not config load balance manually

4bc91ae · Answer

A - COST EFFECTIVE (lambda is only solution where users pay by invocation)

ukivanlamlpi · Answer

NOT B and C, because ALB is not serverless architecture
NOT D, because Beantalk is not serverless architecture

A is also most effective

SAP-C02 Exam - Question 7

Discussion