A company runs an application on Amazon EC2 instances behind an Elastic Load Balancer (ELB) in an Auto Scaling group. The application performs well except during a 2-hour period of daily peak traffic, when performance slows.
A CloudOps engineer must resolve this issue with minimal operational effort.
What should the engineer do?
According to the AWS Cloud Operations and Compute documentation, when workloads exhibit predictable traffic patterns, the best practice is to use scheduled scaling for Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling groups.
With scheduled scaling, administrators can predefine the desired capacity of an Auto Scaling group to increase before anticipated demand (in this case, before the 2-hour peak) and scale back down afterward. This ensures that sufficient compute capacity is provisioned proactively, avoiding performance degradation while maintaining cost efficiency.
AWS notes: ''Scheduled actions enable scaling your Auto Scaling group at predictable times, allowing you to pre-warm instances before demand spikes.''
Manual scaling (Option D) adds operational overhead. Adjusting launch templates (Option B) doesn't affect scaling behavior, and permanently increasing minimum capacity (Option A) wastes resources outside of peak hours.
Thus, Option C provides an automated, cost-effective, and operationally efficient CloudOps solution.
Optimization]
A company's architecture team must receive immediate email notifications whenever new Amazon EC2 instances are launched in the company's main AWS production account.
What should a CloudOps engineer do to meet this requirement?
As per the AWS Cloud Operations and Event Monitoring documentation, the most efficient method for event-driven notification is to use Amazon EventBridge to detect specific EC2 API events and trigger a Simple Notification Service (SNS) alert.
EventBridge continuously monitors AWS service events, including RunInstances, which signals the creation of new EC2 instances. When such an event occurs, EventBridge sends it to an SNS topic, which then immediately emails subscribed recipients --- in this case, the architecture team.
This combination provides real-time, serverless notifications with minimal management. SQS (Option C) is designed for queue-based processing, not direct user alerts. User data scripts (Option A) and custom polling with Lambda (Option D) introduce unnecessary operational complexity and latency.
Hence, Option B is the correct and AWS-recommended CloudOps design for immediate launch notifications.
A CloudOps engineer is configuring an Amazon CloudFront distribution to use an SSL/TLS certificate. The CloudOps engineer must ensure automatic certificate renewal.
Which combination of steps will meet this requirement? (Select TWO.)
The AWS Cloud Operations and Security documentation specifies that for Amazon CloudFront, automatic certificate renewal is only supported for certificates issued by AWS Certificate Manager (ACM). When a certificate is managed by ACM and validated through DNS validation, ACM automatically renews the certificate before expiration without requiring manual intervention.
Option A ensures that the certificate is issued and managed by ACM, enabling full integration with CloudFront. Option E (DNS validation) is essential for automation; AWS performs revalidation automatically as long as the DNS validation record remains in place.
By contrast, email validation (Option D) requires manual user confirmation upon renewal, which prevents automatic renewals. Certificates issued by third-party certificate authorities (Option B) are manually managed and must be reimported into ACM after renewal. CloudFront does not have a direct feature (Option C) to renew certificates; it relies on ACM's lifecycle management.
Thus, combining ACM-issued certificates (A) with DNS validation (E) ensures continuous, automated renewal with no downtime or human action required.
A global company runs a critical primary workload in the us-east-1 Region. The company wants to ensure business continuity with minimal downtime in case of a workload failure. The company wants to replicate the workload to a second AWS Region.
A CloudOps engineer needs a solution that achieves a recovery time objective (RTO) of less than 10 minutes and a zero recovery point objective (RPO) to meet service level agreements.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
According to the AWS Cloud Operations and Disaster Recovery documentation, the active-active multi-Region architecture provides the lowest possible RTO and RPO among all disaster recovery strategies. In this approach, workloads are deployed and actively running in multiple AWS Regions simultaneously. All data is continuously replicated in real time between Regions using fully managed replication services, ensuring zero data loss (zero RPO).
Because both Regions are active and capable of handling requests, failover between them is instantaneous, meeting the RTO of less than 10 minutes. Amazon Route 53 is used with weighted or latency-based routing policies and health checks to automatically route traffic away from an impaired Region to the healthy Region without manual intervention.
In contrast:
Pilot Light Architecture maintains only a minimal copy of the environment in the secondary Region. It requires time to scale up infrastructure during a disaster, resulting in longer RTO and potential data loss (non-zero RPO).
Warm Standby Architecture keeps partially running infrastructure in the secondary Region. Although faster than pilot light, it still requires scaling and synchronization, resulting in higher RTO and RPO compared to active-active.
Backup and Restore (option D) relies on periodic backups and restores data when needed. This approach has the highest RTO and RPO, unsuitable for mission-critical workloads demanding high availability and zero data loss.
Therefore, based on AWS-recommended disaster recovery strategies outlined in the AWS Cloud Operations and Disaster Recovery Guide, the Active-Active Multi-Region architecture (Option C) is the only approach that guarantees RTO <10 minutes and RPO = 0, achieving continuous availability and business continuity across Regions.
A company's CloudOps engineer monitors multiple AWS accounts in an organization and checks each account's AWS Health Dashboard. After adding 10 new accounts, the engineer wants to consolidate health alerts from all accounts.
Which solution meets this requirement with the least operational effort?
The AWS Cloud Operations and Governance documentation defines that enabling Organizational View in AWS Health allows the management account in AWS Organizations to view and aggregate health events from all member accounts.
This feature provides a single-pane-of-glass view of service health issues, account-specific events, and planned maintenance across the organization --- without requiring additional automation or data pipelines.
Alternative options (B, C, and D) require custom integration and ongoing maintenance. CloudTrail does not natively forward AWS Health events, and custom Lambda or DynamoDB approaches increase complexity.
Therefore, Option A --- enabling the Organizational View feature in AWS Health --- is the most operationally efficient and AWS-recommended solution.
Sommer
3 days agoSalome
10 days ago