A company uses an SAP application that runs batch jobs that are performance sensitive. The batch jobs can be restarted safely. The SAP application has six application servers. The SAP application…

Question

Options

• ADistribute the SAP application servers equally across three partition placement groups.
• BDistribute the SAP application servers equally across three Availability Zones.
• CDistribute the SAP application servers equally across two Availability Zones.
• DCreate an Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling group across two Availability Zones. Set a minimum capacity

• A
  2% (1)
• B
  80% (35)
• C
  11% (5)
• D
  7% (3)

Explanation

The system must maintain greater than 60% availability, meaning at least 4 of 6 application servers must remain operational at any time. The key risk is an entire Availability Zone becoming unavailable. With 2 AZs (option C): distributing 6 servers as 3 per AZ means losing one AZ leaves only 3 servers running - that is 50% availability, which falls below the 60% threshold and causes a reliability failure. With 3 AZs (option B): distributing 6 servers as 2 per AZ means losing one AZ leaves 4 servers running - that is 67% availability, which satisfies the >60% requirement. Even though the company currently uses a 2-AZ cluster, they must expand to 3 AZs to meet the reliability requirement. Option A (partition placement groups) addresses hardware fault isolation within an AZ but does not protect against AZ-level failures. Option D (Auto Scaling with minimum capacity) does not guarantee the application-level availability threshold since newly launched instances may not be immediately functional in an SAP context.

No community discussion yet for this question.