Your company wants you to build a highly reliable web application with a few public APIs as the backend. You don't expect a lot of user traffic, but traffic could spike occasionally. You want to leverage Cloud Load Balancing, and the solution must be cost-effective for users. What should you do?
For a highly reliable, cost-effective web application with occasional traffic spikes, the optimal approach includes using serverless technologies and a suitable database. Storing static content in a Cloud Storage bucket is cost-effective, as it eliminates the need for a CDN in this scenario. Hosting the APIs on Cloud Functions is ideal because it scales automatically and you only pay for actual usage, reducing costs during periods of low traffic. Finally, saving user data in Firestore is appropriate for scalability and cost, and allows for seamless integration with Cloud Functions.
Answer should be D, https://cloud.google.com/load-balancing/docs/https/setting-up-https-serverless#gcloud:-cloud-functions https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/networking/better-load-balancing-for-app-engine-cloud-run-and-functions
D not use CDN, is D correct answer?
CDN is not needed here. You don't need to service users globally thus latency and locality isn't critical
Spanner is expensive
IMHO CDN is not storage solution to store static html or image
You should look at this https://cloud.google.com/storage/docs/caching
but is it Cloud Functions used for hosting APIs?
Can be hosted. It's cost effective since you get charged on per call basis. If no traffic then no cost will be charged.
If CF you want to use for hosting APIs why not option C. to use CloudRun? It too autoscales to 0 instances for no traffic..
CE using cloud CDN to host static contents which is incorrect.
IMHO, i agree with you. Furthermore: Cloud Storage buckets are a good choice for static web content. Cloud storage buckets behave like a CDN Network: https://cloud.google.com/storage/docs/caching So it is lower cost than CDN.
IMHO it is d), not b). Reason is that you don't need Cloud Spanner just to store user data - FireStore is the better solution. Additionally, I see no indications concerning the requirement to use GKE... Please correct me when I am wrong.
agree with u
That's correct
That's correct
D is the correct answer 1. Cloud CDN is not meant for storing contents. It can only cache but not act as the source-of-truth and moreover the question tells that the user traffic is less. Cloud CDN performs better when the user traffic is high 2. The spikes are very rare and the app gets low traffic most of the time. That said, putting a cluster is an expensive option. choosing a serverless supported app-platform (Cloud Run) and serverless supported DB (Firestore) makes perfect choice here to handle cost during low traffic and also handle any incoming sudden spikes
CDN is for caching. For static website hosting a storage bucket is a good choice, thus A and C are eliminated. B, Cloud Spanner, my nightmare. I accidentally created an empty cloud spanner and it burned like 30-40 USD per day! I got a huge amount of billing from GCP that month! No way to be cost-effective. D, Cloud Functions are good for simple API services and have no cost if not in use. SQL or NoSQL for user data is not a strong factor here, either should be fine.
Store static content such as HTML and images in a Cloud Storage bucket. Use Cloud Functions to host the APIs and save the user data in Firestore
Cloud Spanner is expensive, so it cannot be that option.
in B) it says zonal GKE with worker nodes in multiple zones how zonal and in multiple zones?! And that 100% eliminate B
"zonal" is for conrol plane, workers can be in multiple zones in multi-zone zonal cluster - the wording is just strange, see: https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/how-to/creating-a-zonal-cluster Nevertheless B is still incorrect
The user of Spanner is mad (way to expensive for the requirement). CDN is not a storage solution. I suspect the charging model of firestore is also better for this application, not to mention document databases typically preferred for storing user data.
Correct Answer Is D
D is the correct option since CDN is not for storage of html content, so you have only the option B and D. And the option B required that you have a containerezed application in other way, you can't use k8s. So the option is D.
User data in a relational database is not a good option, A B C are ruled out. Left with D - User data in Firestore.
Actually it is B. Highly reliable, using Load Balancer, Spikes and several API. D is less reliable, as functions will take long to cold start and will have a time out and not using LB. The only draw back is cost.
The correct answer with the lowest cost is D
absolutely D because kubernetes is not cost effective. cloud functions are a better shot
Answer is D. Solution should be cost effective and highly reliable. Cloud storage and firestore is suitable .
xcvxcv
As per ChatGPT , answer is C