A Snowflake Architect is designing a multiple-account design strategy. This strategy will be MOST cost-effective with which scenarios? (Select TWO).

Question

Options

• AThe company wants to clone a production database that resides on AWS to a development
• BWhen dealing with PCI DSS compliance, having separate accounts can be beneficial because
• CThe company needs to support different role-based access control features for the development,
• DDifferent Active Directory instances can be managed more effectively and securely when
• EThe company must use a specific network policy for certain users to allow and block given IP

• A
  22% (7)
• B
  59% (19)
• C
  13% (4)
• E
  6% (2)

Explanation

Multiple Snowflake accounts are most cost-effective and architecturally justified in these two cases. B is correct: PCI DSS compliance often mandates strict isolation of cardholder data environments (CDE). A separate Snowflake account provides a hard boundary - separate encryption keys, separate audit logs, separate network policies, and a clear compliance perimeter - which is much cleaner than trying to isolate within a single account using roles and policies. This reduces compliance audit complexity and risk. D is correct: different Active Directory (or identity provider) instances cannot easily be mapped into a single Snowflake account's SSO/SCIM configuration. Separate accounts allow each business unit or subsidiary with its own IdP to be independently managed without cross-contamination of identity configurations. Choices A and C describe scenarios (cloning across clouds, RBAC differences between environments) that are better and more cheaply handled within a single account using Snowflake's native features like database cloning and role hierarchies. Choice E (network policies per user) can be configured within a single account.

No community discussion yet for this question.