To serve Web traffic for a popular product your chief financial officer and IT director have purchased 10 ml
large heavy utilization Reserved Instances (RIs) evenly spread across two availability zones: Route 53 is used
to deliver the traffic to an Elastic Load Balancer (ELB). After several months, the product grows even more
popular and you need additional capacity As a result, your company purchases two C3.2xlarge medium
utilization Ris You register the two c3 2xlarge instances with your ELB and quickly find that the ml large
instances are at 100% of capacity and the c3 2xlarge instances have significant capacity that’s unused Which
option is the most cost effective and uses EC2 capacity most effectively?
A.
Use a separate ELB for each instance type and distribute load to ELBs with Route 53 weighted round robin
B.
Configure Autoscaning group and Launch Configuration with ELB to add up to 10 more on-demand mi large
instances when triggered by Cloudwatch shut off c3 2xiarge instances
C.
Route traffic to EC2 ml large and c3 2xlarge instances directly using Route 53 latency based routing and
health checks shut off ELB
D.
Configure ELB with two c3 2xiarge Instances and use on-demand Autoscailng group for up to two additional
c3.2xlarge instances Shut on mi .large instances.
a
0
0
A
0
0
D
0
0
A
0
0
https://acloud.guru/forums/aws-certified-solutions-architect-associate/discussion/-KQuqOYdxDrLF6Nt7GHP/?answer=-KQxdV9OCTXHEQSK76g6
0
0
Why on earth would you guys be choosing A? That makes no sense in this scenario at all.
It clearly states the c3 2xLarge instances are too much machine for this telling us that processor is not the bottleneck.
It was also clear that they have reserved instances for the original capacity types so shutting them down is not financially smart. You would still be charged for something that you are no longer using. You can’t modify a reservation outside if the original family. You can only change tee-shirt sizes.
B is the only logical answer.
0
0
this comment I think the best for this question
This is a strange one…
I have to go with A
A solves the problem, however you are adding another ELB which will increase your bill by $10 per month.
B and D don’t work at all. You’re shutting down instances you already paid for and wasting that money already spent, plus maybe spinning up more instances and spending even more money. I don’t think this is the answer they’re looking for.
C also doesn’t work. Firstly I doubt Amazon would recommend removing a load balancer and sending traffic directly to a group of instances using multiple public IP addresses. But mainly because latency based routing isn’t the correct routing policy and won’t even solve the problem, you would need to use weighted routing. Latency based routing is more useful when your application is deployed in different regions and users from around the world can be routed to the least latent region.
.. so I’m going with A.
1
0
A.
http://jayendrapatil.com/tag/connection-draining/
0
0