A customer has an online and batch processing application. The batch process can be executed multiple times during the day on demand and can overlap the online application. RuleApps and rulesets are…

Question

Options

• A
  • Use an embedded approach for the online application and batch application to address
• B
  • Separate infrastructure from online to batch, each one configured in a separate cluster.
• C
  • Configure 2 clusters in the same cell where the online application is running: one
• D
  • Use separate infrastructure for online and batch processing.

• A
  22% (8)
• B
  14% (5)
• C
  6% (2)
• D
  58% (21)

Explanation

Separating infrastructure for online and batch (D) is correct because batch processes with high throughput requirements can create resource contention that degrades online application responsiveness - isolation ensures each workload scales independently without impacting the other, while the shared RuleApps/rulesets can simply be deployed to both environments.

Why the distractors fail:

• A (embedded approach for both) - Embedded deployments share the JVM/process of the calling application, making it impossible to independently scale or tune for high-throughput batch workloads without impacting online users.
• B (separate clusters in separate cells) - Using separate cells adds unnecessary complexity and operational overhead; the RuleApps are identical, so separate cells provide no benefit and complicate ruleset synchronization.
• C (two clusters in the same cell) - Keeping both workloads in the same cell still creates shared resource pressure at the cell level; it doesn't provide true isolation for high-throughput batch spikes.

Memory tip: Think "batch = bulk = bully" - a high-throughput batch job will bully online traffic unless they live on completely separate infrastructure. When you see "high throughput batch + online coexistence," the answer is always full infrastructure separation (D).

No community discussion yet for this question.