You need to reduce the cost of virtual machines (VM) for your organization. After reviewing different options, you decide to leverage preemptible VM instances.
Which application is suitable for preemptible VMs?
You need to reduce the cost of virtual machines (VM) for your organization. After reviewing different options, you decide to leverage preemptible VM instances.
Which application is suitable for preemptible VMs?
A scalable in-memory caching system is well-suited for preemptible VMs because it can tolerate interruptions in service. If a preemptible VM is terminated, the cache can be rebuilt or repopulated without significant disruption to the overall application, as the system is designed to accommodate such transient failures. Preemptible VMs are suitable for non-critical, fault-tolerant applications, and an in-memory caching system fits this criterion better than the other options provided.
D is correct
A A GPU-accelerated video rendering platform that retrieves and stores videos in a storage bucket: Video rendering requires a stable and powerful infrastructure with persistent storage, which is not provided by preemptible VMs. Additionally, GPUs are not available on all preemptible VM instances.
https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instances/preemptible#preemptible-with-gpu
ans: D
Agree with you on Answer D
D GPU-accelerated video rendering platform that retrieves and stores videos in a storage bucket: Video rendering requires a stable and powerful infrastructure with persistent storage, which is not provided by preemptible VMs. Additionally, GPUs are not available on all preemptible VM instances.
Why not A? "A scalable in-memory caching system." In general a caching system is not critical to the function of an application. If the cache is down it will cause requests to have cache miss and query the DB instead. User requests will still get served albeit slower. In addition the answer specifies that the caching system is "scalable" reducing further the impact of 1 VM getting preempted, ie traffic can be automatically redirected to other cache replicas. To me all other answers seem to have a more severe impact on the user in case the VM is preempted.
D - external persistent storage
D https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instances/preemptible
D is correct
D is correct
i think is C, database cluster is storage, and distributed, eventually consistence is resistant for the preempted. and sufficient quorum can ensure the DB transitions.
C is more accurate
Ans is D Video rendering service is like application type called Batch job. Therefore, we can use instance type preemptible for them. If they complete task, they could be destroy and generate new instance to work continuously next task.
I would go with A compared to other options
ans: A Preemptible VMs are best suited for fault-tolerant, non-critical applications due to their temporary nature. Among the options listed, A, a scalable in-memory caching system, aligns well with preemptible instances as it can handle interruptions and doesn't require continuous uptime.
C is the right answer
Option D
Will go with D. Looking for cost effective. https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instances/preemptible#preemptible-with-gpu
It seems A & D both as suitable answer. But I'll go with A, as attaching GPU with preemptible VM will increase cost, and in this question the purpose of opting for preemptible VM is reducing cost. https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instances/preemptible#preemptible-with-gpu
cannot be A, if the VM is removed by the preemption process, we lose data in memory