SAP-C02 · Question #229
A solutions architect is designing the data storage and retrieval architecture for a new application that a company will be launching soon. The application is designed to ingest millions of small…
The correct answer is B. Design the application to store each incoming record in an Amazon DynamoDB table properly. DynamoDB with TTL, cheaper for sustained throughput of small items + suited for fast retrievals. S3 cheaper for storage only, much higher costs with writes. RDS not designed for this use case.
Question
A solutions architect is designing the data storage and retrieval architecture for a new application that a company will be launching soon. The application is designed to ingest millions of small records per minute from devices all around the world. Each record is less than 4 KB in size and needs to be stored in a durable location where it can be retrieved with low latency. The data is ephemeral and the company is required to store the data for 120 days only, after which the data can be deleted. The solutions architect calculates that, during the course of a year, the storage requirements would be about 10-15 TB. Which storage strategy is the MOST cost-effective and meets the design requirements?
Options
- ADesign the application to store each incoming record as a single .csv file in an Amazon S3 bucket
- BDesign the application to store each incoming record in an Amazon DynamoDB table properly
- CDesign the application to store each incoming record in a single table in an Amazon RDS MySQL
- DDesign the application to batch incoming records before writing them to an Amazon S3 bucket.
How the community answered
(30 responses)- A10% (3)
- B67% (20)
- C17% (5)
- D7% (2)
Explanation
DynamoDB with TTL, cheaper for sustained throughput of small items + suited for fast retrievals. S3 cheaper for storage only, much higher costs with writes. RDS not designed for this use case.
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.