SOL-C01 · Question #169
SOL-C01 Question #169: Real Exam Question with Answer & Explanation
The correct answer is D: Keep the X-Large warehouse but investigate other potential bottlenecks, such as the file format. Since the X-Large warehouse is underutilized, increasing its size is not cost-effective. Reducing the size might further degrade performance. Enabling auto-suspend only addresses idle costs. The best approach is to investigate other potential bottlenecks while maintaining the cur
Question
You have a Snowflake table named 'SALES DATA' that you load data into daily from a CSV file using Snowsight. Recently, the load times have increased significantly. You suspect the Virtual Warehouse size is the bottleneck. You have the following Virtual Warehouse sizes available: X- Small, Small, Medium, Large, X-Large. Choosing the best size depends on cost and speed. You examine the Query History in Snowsight and notice that the COPY INTO commands are consistently using only a small fraction of the X-Large warehouse's compute resources. Which of the following actions would be the MOST cost- effective while also potentially improving (or at least maintaining) the data loading performance?
Options
- AIncrease the Virtual Warehouse size to 2X-Large. This will guarantee faster load times.
- BDecrease the Virtual Warehouse size to Small or Medium. Since the current warehouse is
- CEnable auto-suspend on the X-Large warehouse if it isn't already enabled. This will reduce costs
- DKeep the X-Large warehouse but investigate other potential bottlenecks, such as the file format
- ESwitch to using Snowpipe for continuous data ingestion instead of COPY INTO. This may improve
Explanation
Since the X-Large warehouse is underutilized, increasing its size is not cost-effective. Reducing the size might further degrade performance. Enabling auto-suspend only addresses idle costs. The best approach is to investigate other potential bottlenecks while maintaining the current (potentially oversized) warehouse. Using a dedicated warehouse isolates the loading workload. Snowpipe is a good alternative, but it's a more complex solution that requires evaluation and isn't the immediately cost effective solution. Option D addresses both performance and cost concerns without making assumptions about Snowpipe's suitability in this specific scenario. Parallel threads increase concurrency, which can speed up loading of multiple files.
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.