Visit here for our full Amazon AWS Certified Developer – Associate DVA-C02 exam dumps and practice test questions.
Q161
A developer is building a serverless application using AWS Lambda. The application processes files uploaded to an S3 bucket. Which service should be used to trigger the Lambda function when files are uploaded?
A) Amazon SNS
B) Amazon SQS
C) S3 event notifications
D) Amazon EventBridge
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question addresses event-driven architectures in serverless applications. Understanding S3 event notifications helps developers implement automated file processing workflows. S3 event notifications should be used to trigger Lambda functions when files are uploaded to S3 buckets, providing direct integration between S3 and Lambda for file processing workflows. S3 event notifications can automatically invoke Lambda functions in response to bucket events including object creation (PUT, POST, COPY), object removal, object restore from Glacier, and replication events. This enables serverless architectures where file uploads automatically trigger processing without polling or manual intervention. Configuration involves enabling S3 event notifications on bucket, specifying event types to monitor like s3:ObjectCreated, defining filters based on object key prefixes or suffixes enabling selective processing, configuring Lambda function as destination, and granting S3 permission to invoke Lambda. When files matching criteria are uploaded, S3 automatically invokes Lambda function passing event details including bucket name, object key, size, and metadata. Common use cases include image processing triggering thumbnailing or format conversion, data transformation processing uploaded CSV or JSON files, content validation scanning uploaded files for compliance, archival workflows moving processed files to different storage tiers, and ETL pipelines extracting and transforming uploaded data. Benefits include zero infrastructure management with fully serverless architecture, automatic scaling as Lambda handles concurrent invocations, immediate processing with near real-time triggering, cost efficiency paying only for actual processing, and simplified architecture eliminating polling mechanisms. Best practices include using prefix or suffix filters limiting which objects trigger functions, implementing idempotent Lambda functions handling duplicate invocations, using S3 object metadata to track processing state, implementing error handling and retry logic, monitoring Lambda executions and failures, and considering async processing for long-running tasks. Lambda functions should handle various file sizes, implement timeout configurations, use appropriate memory allocation for processing requirements, and log comprehensively for troubleshooting. Organizations should design for failure scenarios, implement dead letter queues for failed invocations, test thoroughly with various file types and sizes, and monitor costs as processing scales. S3 event notifications provide direct integration optimized for file processing scenarios. Amazon SNS is incorrect because while SNS can be S3 notification target, it requires additional configuration and Lambda must subscribe to SNS topic, adding complexity versus direct S3-Lambda integration. Amazon SQS is incorrect because SQS can also be S3 notification target but requires Lambda to poll queue, less efficient than direct invocation. Amazon EventBridge is incorrect because while EventBridge can route S3 events, S3 event notifications provide simpler direct integration for Lambda triggering.
Q162
A developer needs to store session state for a web application across multiple EC2 instances. Which AWS service provides the BEST solution?
A) Amazon EBS
B) Amazon S3
C) Amazon ElastiCache
D) Amazon EFS
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question tests understanding of session management in distributed applications. Knowledge of ElastiCache helps developers implement scalable stateful applications. Amazon ElastiCache provides the best solution for storing session state across multiple EC2 instances by offering in-memory caching with high performance, low latency, and built-in replication. Session state management requires fast read and write operations, shared access across multiple application servers, persistence across server failures, and scalability for growing user bases. ElastiCache supports Redis and Memcached engines, both suitable for session storage with different characteristics. Redis provides persistence, replication, automatic failover, and advanced data structures, while Memcached offers simpler key-value storage with horizontal scaling. For session management, Redis is typically preferred due to persistence and replication ensuring session data survives cache node failures. Implementation involves creating ElastiCache cluster, configuring application to store sessions in cache instead of local memory, using session IDs as cache keys, setting appropriate TTL for session expiration, and implementing connection pooling for efficiency. Benefits include microsecond latency for session operations, horizontal scaling across multiple cache nodes, high availability through replication and automatic failover, offloading session storage from application servers, and support for millions of requests per second. Common architecture has web application servers connecting to ElastiCache cluster storing session data, with load balancer distributing traffic across servers. Any server can access any session enabling true stateless application design. Best practices include using Redis with cluster mode for horizontal scaling, enabling Multi-AZ with automatic failover for high availability, implementing appropriate TTL matching session timeout requirements, using connection pooling reducing overhead, monitoring cache hit rates and performance metrics, implementing proper security with VPC and encryption, and backing up critical session data if required. Organizations should size ElastiCache clusters appropriately for expected load, monitor memory utilization, implement eviction policies, and plan for growth. Session serialization should be efficient minimizing storage size and processing time. Testing should verify session persistence across failovers and validate performance under load. ElastiCache eliminates session stickiness requirements at load balancer enabling better traffic distribution. Amazon EBS is incorrect because EBS provides block storage for single EC2 instances not shared across multiple instances, unsuitable for distributed session storage. Amazon S3 is incorrect because S3 provides object storage with higher latency unsuitable for frequent session read/write operations requiring millisecond response times. Amazon EFS is incorrect because while EFS provides shared file storage across instances, it has higher latency than in-memory caching inappropriate for session state operations.
Q163
A developer is implementing a microservices architecture. Which AWS service enables service-to-service communication using API calls?
A) Amazon SQS
B) Amazon SNS
C) AWS App Mesh
D) Amazon API Gateway
Answer: D
Explanation:
This question addresses microservices communication patterns. Understanding API Gateway helps developers implement RESTful service-to-service communication. Amazon API Gateway enables service-to-service communication using API calls by providing managed API endpoints, request routing, authentication, throttling, and monitoring. API Gateway acts as front door for microservices accepting API calls from services or clients, routing to appropriate backend services, and returning responses. This enables RESTful communication patterns common in microservices architectures where services expose APIs consumed by other services. API Gateway supports REST APIs for request-response patterns, WebSocket APIs for persistent connections, and HTTP APIs for simpler lower-cost scenarios. Configuration involves creating API, defining resources and methods matching service endpoints, integrating with backend services via Lambda, HTTP endpoints, or AWS services, implementing authentication using IAM, Cognito, or custom authorizers, enabling throttling and quotas preventing abuse, and deploying to stages for environment management. Benefits include managed infrastructure eliminating server management, automatic scaling handling traffic spikes, built-in security features including authentication and authorization, request transformation and validation, comprehensive monitoring and logging, and version management through stages. Common microservices patterns include API Gateway fronting multiple Lambda functions each implementing service logic, routing to containerized services on ECS or EKS, or proxying to services on EC2. API Gateway enables service mesh communication, supports canary deployments for gradual rollouts, and provides caching reducing backend load. Best practices include implementing proper authentication and authorization, using API keys for service identification, enabling throttling protecting backend services, implementing CORS for browser-based clients, using custom domains for professional endpoints, monitoring metrics for performance and errors, implementing request validation reducing invalid requests, and using stages for development, testing, and production environments. Organizations should design APIs following REST principles, version APIs appropriately, document using OpenAPI specifications, implement circuit breakers and retries, and monitor service dependencies. API Gateway integrates with CloudWatch for logging and metrics, X-Ray for tracing, and WAF for security. While API Gateway excels at synchronous request-response patterns, asynchronous patterns may benefit from messaging services. Amazon SQS is incorrect because SQS provides asynchronous message queuing not synchronous API call patterns required for request-response service communication. Amazon SNS is incorrect because SNS provides pub-sub messaging for fanout scenarios not direct service-to-service API communication. AWS App Mesh is incorrect because App Mesh provides service mesh infrastructure for service discovery and traffic management but doesn’t directly enable API calls, typically used with other communication mechanisms.
Q164
A developer needs to ensure that sensitive data in DynamoDB is encrypted at rest. What should be configured?
A) Enable SSL/TLS for connections
B) Enable DynamoDB encryption at rest
C) Encrypt data before writing to DynamoDB
D) Use VPC endpoints
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question tests knowledge of data protection in DynamoDB. Understanding encryption at rest helps developers secure sensitive information. DynamoDB encryption at rest should be configured to ensure sensitive data is encrypted when stored, providing transparent encryption of all table data including primary keys, local and global secondary indexes, streams, backups, and replicas. Encryption at rest protects data stored on disk from unauthorized access if physical storage is compromised. DynamoDB offers encryption at rest using AWS Key Management Service with options including AWS owned keys requiring no configuration and no additional cost but limiting key control, AWS managed keys automatically created and managed by AWS with CloudTrail logging of key usage, and customer managed keys providing full control over key policies, rotation, and auditing. Enabling encryption at rest involves selecting encryption option during table creation or updating existing tables, choosing key type based on requirements, and optionally configuring key rotation. Encryption and decryption are transparent to applications requiring no code changes. Encrypted tables perform identically to non-encrypted with AWS handling encryption overhead. Benefits include data protection meeting compliance requirements, transparent operation with no application changes, integrated key management through KMS, audit trails showing key usage, and flexibility choosing encryption keys based on requirements. Compliance frameworks like PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and FedRAMP often require encryption at rest making it mandatory for regulated data. Best practices include enabling encryption at rest for all tables containing sensitive data, using customer managed keys when granular access control is needed, implementing key rotation policies, monitoring key usage through CloudTrail, restricting key access using IAM policies, encrypting backups containing sensitive data, and documenting encryption strategies. Organizations should classify data determining encryption requirements, standardize encryption approaches across tables, automate encryption configuration, and regularly audit encryption status. DynamoDB encryption at rest complements encryption in transit protecting data throughout its lifecycle. For highly sensitive data, combining encryption at rest with application-level encryption provides defense in depth. Enable SSL/TLS for connections is incorrect because SSL/TLS encrypts data in transit between client and DynamoDB but doesn’t protect data at rest on disk. Encrypt data before writing to DynamoDB is incorrect because while client-side encryption is possible, it requires application code changes and doesn’t leverage DynamoDB’s built-in encryption at rest feature. Use VPC endpoints is incorrect because VPC endpoints provide private connectivity without internet traversal but don’t encrypt data at rest.
Q165
A developer is building a Lambda function that requires access to a relational database. What is the BEST practice for storing database credentials?
A) Environment variables
B) AWS Secrets Manager
C) Hard-coded in function code
D) Configuration file in S3
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question addresses secure credential management in serverless applications. Understanding Secrets Manager helps developers protect sensitive information. AWS Secrets Manager is the best practice for storing database credentials used by Lambda functions, providing secure storage, automatic rotation, fine-grained access control, and audit logging. Secrets Manager stores credentials encrypted at rest using KMS, provides automatic rotation for supported databases including RDS, enables version management tracking credential changes, and integrates with IAM for access control. Lambda functions retrieve credentials at runtime using Secrets Manager API avoiding hardcoding or exposing credentials in code or configuration files. Implementation involves storing database credentials in Secrets Manager, granting Lambda execution role permission to retrieve specific secrets, retrieving credentials in Lambda function code using SDK, caching credentials appropriately balancing security with performance, and handling credential rotation gracefully. Benefits include centralized credential management, automatic rotation reducing exposure from compromised credentials, encryption at rest and in transit, audit logging showing credential access, elimination of hardcoded credentials, and simplified credential updates affecting all consumers. Secrets Manager supports automatic rotation for Amazon RDS, Amazon DocumentDB, and Amazon Redshift with custom rotation Lambda functions for other systems. Best practices include using unique credentials per application or function following least privilege, enabling automatic rotation when supported, implementing credential caching with appropriate TTL reducing API calls while maintaining security, handling rotation properly ensuring functions work with both current and previous credentials during rotation, monitoring credential retrieval through CloudWatch and CloudTrail, setting up alerts for failed retrievals, restricting secret access using resource-based policies, and testing rotation procedures verifying applications handle gracefully. Organizations should establish secrets management policies, automate secret creation and rotation, regularly audit secret access, eliminate hardcoded credentials from codebases, and implement secret scanning in CI/CD pipelines. Lambda functions should retrieve secrets at initialization or when needed, cache appropriately, and handle retrieval failures. When credentials rotate, functions using cached values should detect authentication failures and refresh credentials. Secrets Manager charges per secret and API call making caching important for cost optimization. Environment variables is incorrect because while Lambda supports encrypted environment variables, Secrets Manager provides superior security with automatic rotation, versioning, and centralized management. Hard-coded in function code is incorrect because hardcoding credentials is security anti-pattern exposing credentials in code repositories and preventing secure rotation. Configuration file in S3 is incorrect because while S3 can store encrypted files, it lacks Secrets Manager’s rotation capabilities and access auditing making it less suitable for credentials.
Q166
A developer needs to process messages from an SQS queue but wants to prevent other consumers from processing the same message simultaneously. Which SQS feature provides this capability?
A) Message deletion
B) Visibility timeout
C) Message retention
D) Dead letter queue
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question tests understanding of SQS message handling. Knowledge of visibility timeout helps developers implement reliable message processing. Visibility timeout provides the capability to prevent other consumers from processing the same message simultaneously by temporarily hiding messages after a consumer retrieves them. When consumer receives message from SQS queue, the message becomes invisible to other consumers for visibility timeout duration. During this period, the retrieving consumer should process the message and delete it from queue. If processing completes successfully and message is deleted, other consumers never see it. If processing fails or consumer crashes without deleting message, visibility timeout expires and message becomes visible again for other consumers to process. This mechanism ensures at-least-once delivery while preventing duplicate concurrent processing. Visibility timeout is configurable per queue with default of 30 seconds and maximum of 12 hours. Consumers can dynamically adjust visibility timeout for specific messages using ChangeMessageVisibility API when processing requires more time than default timeout. Configuration involves setting queue visibility timeout appropriate for expected processing duration, implementing consumer logic to process and delete messages within timeout, extending timeout for long-running operations, and handling timeout expiration gracefully. Benefits include prevention of duplicate concurrent processing, automatic retry when processing fails, flexible timeout adjustment per message, and simplified error handling. Common patterns include setting conservative timeout values longer than expected processing time, monitoring timeout expirations indicating processing issues, implementing exponential backoff for retries, and using dead letter queues for messages failing repeatedly. Best practices include choosing visibility timeout matching actual processing time, implementing idempotent processing handling potential duplicate deliveries when messages reappear, deleting messages promptly after successful processing, using ChangeMessageVisibility for long operations, monitoring queue metrics for visibility timeout expirations, implementing proper error handling and retries, and configuring dead letter queues capturing messages exceeding retry limits. Organizations should tune visibility timeout based on actual processing duration, monitor for timeout-related issues, implement resilient consumers handling message reappearance, and design for at-least-once delivery semantics. Visibility timeout doesn’t guarantee exactly-once delivery so consumers must handle potential duplicates through idempotency. SQS FIFO queues provide exactly-once processing within deduplication interval. Message deletion is incorrect because deletion removes messages permanently after processing but doesn’t prevent concurrent processing before deletion occurs. Message retention is incorrect because retention determines how long messages remain in queue before automatic deletion, not preventing concurrent processing. Dead letter queue is incorrect because DLQ captures messages that fail processing repeatedly but doesn’t prevent concurrent processing of messages in main queue.
Q167
A developer is creating a REST API using API Gateway and Lambda. Which API Gateway feature allows controlling the rate of API requests?
A) Resource policies
B) Usage plans with API keys
C) CORS configuration
D) Request validation
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question addresses API rate limiting and quota management. Understanding usage plans helps developers protect APIs from abuse and implement tiered access. Usage plans with API keys allow controlling the rate of API requests by defining throttling limits and quotas for different customer tiers or use cases. Usage plans specify rate limits (requests per second), burst capacity (maximum concurrent requests), and quotas (total requests per day, week, or month). API keys identify clients enabling request attribution to specific usage plans and enforcement of associated limits. Configuration involves creating usage plan defining throttle and quota settings, generating API keys, associating keys with usage plan, requiring API keys in API Gateway stage settings, and distributing keys to clients. Clients include API key in request headers enabling API Gateway to enforce rate limits. When limits are exceeded, API Gateway returns 429 Too Many Requests responses. Benefits include protection against traffic spikes preventing backend overwhelm, implementation of tiered service models with different limits for different customer levels, prevention of abuse from single consumers, monetization enablement through usage-based pricing, and fair resource allocation across consumers. Common patterns include free tier with low limits, paid tiers with higher limits, partner tier with preferential access, and internal tier for organizational use. Usage plans support multiple stages enabling different limits across development, staging, and production environments. Best practices include setting conservative default rate limits protecting backends, implementing burst capacity accommodating temporary spikes, configuring appropriate quotas matching business models, monitoring API usage patterns, adjusting limits based on actual capacity and usage, implementing graduated limits encouraging upgrades, communicating limits clearly to consumers, providing mechanisms for limit increases, and tracking key usage for billing. Organizations should design usage plans matching monetization strategy, monitor enforcement effectiveness, alert when consumers approach limits, implement graceful degradation when throttled, and regularly review and adjust limits. API Gateway throttling operates at account and API level with more granular control through usage plans. Developers should implement client-side retry logic with exponential backoff handling throttling responses. Resource policies is incorrect because resource policies control who can invoke APIs based on AWS principals and IP addresses but don’t implement rate limiting. CORS configuration is incorrect because CORS enables cross-origin browser requests but doesn’t control request rates. Request validation is incorrect because validation ensures requests conform to models but doesn’t implement throttling or quotas.
Q168
A developer needs to ensure a Lambda function processes DynamoDB stream records in order. Which DynamoDB stream view type should be used?
A) KEYS_ONLY
B) NEW_IMAGE
C) OLD_IMAGE
D) Any view type maintains order
Answer: D
Explanation:
This question tests understanding of DynamoDB Streams ordering guarantees. Knowledge of stream processing helps developers implement event-driven architectures reliably. Any DynamoDB stream view type maintains order because DynamoDB Streams guarantee ordering of records per partition key regardless of view type selected. DynamoDB Streams capture item-level modifications in tables providing time-ordered sequence of events enabling applications to react to data changes. When items with same partition key are modified, stream records for those items appear in order they occurred. This per-partition-key ordering guarantee applies to all stream view types. View types determine what information is included in stream records: KEYS_ONLY contains only partition and sort keys, NEW_IMAGE contains entire item after modification, OLD_IMAGE contains entire item before modification, and NEW_AND_OLD_IMAGES contains both before and after states. View type selection depends on processing requirements not ordering needs. Lambda functions processing DynamoDB Streams receive batches of records in order for each partition key. If processing batch fails, Lambda retries entire batch maintaining order. Configuration involves enabling streams on DynamoDB table, selecting view type based on data requirements, creating Lambda function processing stream records, configuring event source mapping between stream and function, and implementing idempotent processing handling retries. Benefits include guaranteed ordering per partition key enabling sequential processing, automatic Lambda scaling processing multiple partition keys in parallel, integration with AWS ecosystem, and reliable event delivery. Common use cases include data replication synchronizing between tables or regions, triggering workflows when data changes, maintaining aggregates or materialized views, implementing audit logs, and event sourcing patterns. Best practices include designing tables with partition keys supporting desired ordering granularity, implementing idempotent Lambda functions handling duplicate records from retries, processing batches efficiently within Lambda timeout limits, using appropriate view type minimizing data transfer, monitoring stream processing lag, handling processing failures with error queues, and testing failure scenarios verifying order preservation. Organizations should understand ordering guarantees apply per partition key not globally, design partitioning schemes accordingly, implement proper error handling, and monitor processing performance. When global ordering is required, different approaches like single partition key or external sequencing may be necessary. While all view types maintain order, KEYS_ONLY transfers least data reducing costs and processing time when full item data isn’t needed, NEW_IMAGE is common when only current state matters, OLD_IMAGE helps track what changed, and NEW_AND_OLD_IMAGES enables comparison. KEYS_ONLY, NEW_IMAGE, and OLD_IMAGE being incorrect individually emphasizes that ordering is independent of view type selection.
Q169
A developer is implementing authentication for a mobile application. Which AWS service provides user sign-up, sign-in, and access control?
A) AWS IAM
B) Amazon Cognito
C) AWS STS
D) AWS SSO
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question addresses user authentication in mobile and web applications. Understanding Cognito helps developers implement secure user management. Amazon Cognito provides user sign-up, sign-in, and access control specifically designed for mobile and web applications offering user pools for authentication and identity pools for authorization. Cognito User Pools provide directory service managing user registration, authentication, account recovery, and profile management with built-in UI components, social identity federation, multi-factor authentication, and password policies. Cognito Identity Pools provide temporary AWS credentials enabling authenticated users to access AWS services directly from mobile or web applications with appropriate permissions. Implementation involves creating Cognito User Pool configuring password policies, MFA, and verification settings, integrating User Pool with application using AWS Amplify, SDKs, or hosted UI, creating Identity Pool mapping authenticated users to IAM roles, configuring IAM policies defining AWS resource access, and implementing sign-up, sign-in, and password recovery flows. Benefits include managed user directory eliminating custom authentication code, scalability handling millions of users, security features including adaptive authentication and account takeover protection, social identity federation with Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Apple, enterprise identity federation via SAML and OpenID Connect, customizable workflows using Lambda triggers, and standards-based authentication using OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect. Common architecture has mobile apps authenticating users with Cognito User Pools receiving JWT tokens, exchanging tokens with Identity Pools for temporary AWS credentials, and accessing AWS services like S3, DynamoDB, or API Gateway using those credentials. Best practices include enabling MFA for enhanced security, implementing password complexity requirements, customizing authentication flows using Lambda triggers, monitoring for suspicious activity, implementing account recovery procedures, regularly rotating secrets, restricting AWS resource access using fine-grained IAM policies, testing authentication flows thoroughly, and planning for scaling. Organizations should implement proper security controls, comply with privacy regulations, educate users on security features like MFA, monitor authentication metrics, and maintain user data appropriately. Cognito integrates with other AWS services and supports industry standards enabling interoperability. AWS IAM is incorrect because IAM manages access for AWS services and resources, not user authentication for mobile/web applications targeting end users. AWS STS is incorrect because STS provides temporary security credentials but doesn’t include user management or authentication services. AWS SSO is incorrect because it provides single sign-on for organizational users accessing multiple AWS accounts and business applications, not designed for customer-facing mobile/web apps.
Q170
A developer needs to automatically scale Lambda function concurrency based on the number of messages in an SQS queue. What should be configured?
A) Lambda reserved concurrency
B) Lambda provisioned concurrency
C) Event source mapping with batch size
D) CloudWatch alarms with auto scaling
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question tests understanding of Lambda scaling with SQS. Knowledge of event source mapping helps developers optimize message processing. Event source mapping with batch size configuration should be used to automatically scale Lambda function concurrency based on messages in SQS queue, as Lambda automatically manages scaling of polling instances processing messages. When Lambda function is triggered by SQS queue through event source mapping, Lambda automatically scales the number of concurrent function invocations based on queue depth and processing rate. Event source mapping polls SQS queue, retrieves messages in batches, invokes function with batches, and scales polling activity up or down based on queue characteristics. Configuration involves creating event source mapping between SQS queue and Lambda function, configuring batch size determining messages per invocation, setting batch window for time-based batching, configuring maximum concurrency if limiting scale, and optionally setting error handling parameters. Lambda automatically increases polling activity when queue depth grows and decreases when queue is empty. For standard queues, Lambda can scale up to 1000 concurrent executions by default or account limit. For FIFO queues, Lambda scales to number of active message groups. Benefits include automatic scaling without configuration, no polling code required, efficient batch processing reducing invocations, built-in error handling with DLQ support, and cost optimization processing only when messages exist. Best practices include choosing appropriate batch sizes balancing processing efficiency with timeout risks, implementing idempotent functions handling potential duplicate messages, setting appropriate function timeout accounting for batch processing time, monitoring function duration and throttling, configuring DLQ capturing failed messages, using partial batch responses allowing successful message deletion while retrying failures, and implementing proper error handling. Organizations should tune batch size based on message size and processing complexity, monitor scaling behavior, implement backoff strategies for downstream service throttling, and design for variable load. Lambda’s automatic scaling eliminates need for manual management but understanding scaling characteristics helps optimization. Maximum concurrent executions can be configured limiting scale when needed. Lambda reserved concurrency is incorrect because reserved concurrency allocates specific concurrency limit to function but doesn’t automatically scale based on queue depth. Lambda provisioned concurrency is incorrect because provisioned concurrency keeps functions initialized for low-latency invocation but doesn’t control scaling based on SQS queue. CloudWatch alarms with auto scaling is incorrect because while alarms can trigger actions, Lambda automatically scales SQS polling without requiring external scaling configuration.
Q171
A developer is building an application that needs to query data by attributes other than the primary key in DynamoDB. What should be implemented?
A) Scan operation
B) Query operation with sort key
C) Global secondary index
D) Update item with conditions
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question addresses flexible querying in DynamoDB. Understanding global secondary indexes helps developers design efficient data access patterns. Global secondary index (GSI) should be implemented to query data by attributes other than primary key, enabling efficient queries on alternate attributes without table scans. GSIs provide alternate partition and sort keys creating different access patterns for same data. Primary table has one primary key structure, but GSIs allow defining additional key structures each supporting efficient queries. Unlike local secondary indexes limited to same partition key as base table, GSIs use completely different partition key enabling queries across entire table by alternate attributes. Creating GSI involves selecting attribute for partition key, optionally selecting attribute for sort key, choosing projected attributes (all, keys only, or specific attributes), and provisioning throughput for GSI separate from base table. GSIs are eventually consistent with base table where writes to table asynchronously propagate to indexes. Applications query GSI like tables using partition key and optionally sort key conditions. Benefits include flexible query patterns without data duplication, efficient queries avoiding costly scans, support for multiple access patterns on same data, independent scaling of index throughput, and projection control optimizing storage costs. Common use cases include user directory queryable by username and email, product catalog searchable by category and price, order system queryable by customer and date, and any scenario requiring multiple query patterns. Best practices include designing GSIs during table planning considering access patterns, projecting only needed attributes reducing storage and costs, provisioning adequate throughput for GSI query load, monitoring GSI throttling separately from base table, designing partition keys distributing load evenly, using sparse indexes where GSI attribute exists only for subset of items, and considering eventual consistency in application design. Organizations should identify query patterns upfront, create GSIs supporting patterns, avoid over-indexing limiting indexes to necessary patterns, monitor costs as GSIs consume storage and throughput, and test query performance. GSIs enable rich querying but have costs and eventual consistency tradeoffs. Scan operation is incorrect because scanning entire table to find items matching criteria is inefficient, slow, and expensive especially for large tables, appropriate only when querying most items. Query operation with sort key is incorrect because querying still requires specifying partition key from primary structure, not enabling queries by arbitrary attributes. Update item with conditions is incorrect because conditional updates modify items but don’t enable querying by alternate attributes.
Q172
A developer needs to ensure Lambda functions in a VPC can access DynamoDB without internet connectivity. What should be configured?
A) NAT Gateway
B) Internet Gateway
C) VPC endpoint for DynamoDB
D) VPN connection
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question addresses secure AWS service access from VPC. Understanding VPC endpoints helps developers implement private connectivity. VPC endpoint for DynamoDB should be configured to ensure Lambda functions in VPC can access DynamoDB without internet connectivity, providing private connection between VPC and DynamoDB service. VPC endpoints eliminate need for internet gateway, NAT device, VPN, or Direct Connect for AWS service access, keeping traffic within AWS network. DynamoDB supports gateway VPC endpoints routing traffic through VPC route tables. Configuring VPC endpoint involves creating gateway endpoint for DynamoDB in VPC, associating endpoint with route tables for subnets containing Lambda functions, updating security groups ensuring outbound HTTPS access, and optionally implementing endpoint policies restricting access. After configuration, Lambda functions route DynamoDB requests through VPC endpoint rather than internet. Benefits include improved security keeping traffic off internet, reduced data transfer costs eliminating NAT gateway charges, better network performance with lower latency, simplified architecture without NAT requirements, and scalability without bandwidth limitations. Lambda functions in VPCs experience cold start latency creating ENIs, but VPC endpoints don’t add latency and improve performance versus internet routing. VPC endpoints support policy-based access control restricting which resources can be accessed through endpoint. Common use cases include Lambda functions processing data in DynamoDB privately, applications in private subnets accessing AWS services, and compliance requirements prohibiting internet traversal for sensitive data. Best practices include creating VPC endpoints for frequently accessed services, implementing endpoint policies enforcing least privilege, monitoring endpoint usage through VPC Flow Logs, considering costs where gateway endpoints are free but interface endpoints charge, documenting VPC endpoint configurations, testing connectivity after deployment, and updating route tables correctly. Organizations should standardize VPC endpoint usage for AWS services, implement across environments, educate teams on private connectivity benefits, and maintain configurations. VPC endpoints eliminate many traditional networking complexities while improving security and performance. NAT Gateway is incorrect because while NAT Gateway enables internet access from private subnets including reaching DynamoDB via internet, it costs more, has lower performance, and routes traffic through internet versus VPC endpoint’s private connection. Internet Gateway is incorrect because it provides internet access but doesn’t enable private connectivity and would require public subnets or NAT. VPN connection is incorrect because VPN connects on-premises networks to VPCs not enabling VPC resources to access AWS services privately.
Q173
A developer is implementing error handling for a Lambda function that processes records from a Kinesis stream. What happens when the function throws an error?
A) The failed record is skipped
B) The function retries the entire batch until success or expiration
C) The failed record moves to dead letter queue
D) The stream stops processing
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question tests understanding of Lambda error handling with streams. Knowledge of retry behavior helps developers implement reliable stream processing. The function retries the entire batch until success or expiration when Lambda function processing Kinesis stream records throws an error, maintaining ordering guarantees for each shard. Lambda manages stream processing by continuously polling shards, retrieving batches of records, invoking functions with batches, and tracking processing position in each shard. When function execution fails due to exception, timeout, or throttling, Lambda retries entire batch with exponential backoff and jitter. Retries continue until function succeeds, records expire from stream based on retention period, or bisect batch failures isolate problematic records. This behavior ensures at-least-once processing and maintains ordering within each shard. Lambda processes each shard independently enabling parallel processing across multiple shards while maintaining per-shard ordering. Failed records block processing of subsequent records in same shard until resolution. Configuration involves implementing robust error handling in function code, setting appropriate function timeout accommodating batch processing, monitoring function errors and duration, configuring destination for asynchronous invocations capturing metadata, implementing idempotent processing handling retries, and using bisect on function error enabling Lambda to split failed batches. Benefits include automatic retry eliminating manual intervention, ordering preservation critical for many stream processing scenarios, parallel shard processing enabling scale, and integration with CloudWatch for monitoring. Challenges include failed records blocking shard processing potentially causing lag, duplicate processing from retries requiring idempotency, and poison records repeatedly failing requiring special handling. Best practices include implementing try-catch blocks logging errors before propagation allowing partial batch processing, using partial batch responses indicating which records succeeded, implementing exponential backoff for downstream service calls, monitoring iterator age indicating processing lag, setting up alarms for elevated errors, implementing circuit breakers preventing cascading failures, logging failed records for later analysis, and testing failure scenarios. Organizations should design for failure, implement proper observability, handle poison records through filtering or DLQ, and monitor processing lag. Lambda’s retry behavior provides reliability but developers must handle errors appropriately. The failed record is skipped is incorrect because Lambda doesn’t skip failed records, it retries maintaining ordering guarantees. The failed record moves to DLQ is incorrect because Lambda doesn’t automatically move stream records to DLQ though destinations can capture function metadata. The stream stops processing is incorrect because stream continues, though specific shard stops processing subsequent records until failure resolves.
Q174
A developer needs to implement circuit breaker pattern in a distributed application. Which AWS service provides this capability?
A) AWS Step Functions
B) Amazon SQS
C) AWS App Mesh
D) Amazon EventBridge
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question addresses resilience patterns in microservices. Understanding App Mesh helps developers implement service mesh capabilities including circuit breaking. AWS App Mesh provides circuit breaker capability as part of its service mesh features enabling applications to prevent cascading failures when dependent services experience issues. Circuit breakers monitor for failures in downstream services, automatically “open” the circuit stopping requests when failure thresholds are exceeded, allowing time for failing service to recover, then “half-open” circuit testing if service recovered before fully closing circuit. This prevents exhausting resources making requests destined to fail and allows graceful degradation. App Mesh implements circuit breakers through Envoy proxy configuration defining thresholds for consecutive failures, timeout periods, and success criteria for recovery. Configuration involves deploying App Mesh in service environment, defining virtual nodes representing services, configuring listeners and backends, implementing outlier detection configuring ejection thresholds and intervals, setting connection pool limits, defining retry policies, and monitoring circuit breaker metrics. When circuit opens, requests fail fast with errors rather than consuming resources waiting for timeout. Benefits include improved application resilience preventing cascading failures, faster failure detection stopping problematic requests quickly, resource protection preventing thread pool exhaustion, automatic recovery testing service availability periodically, and graceful degradation maintaining partial functionality. Common patterns include circuit breakers for external API calls, database connections, downstream microservices, and third-party integrations. App Mesh provides observability through metrics showing circuit breaker state, ejection counts, and service health. Best practices include configuring appropriate failure thresholds balancing sensitivity with avoiding false positives, setting ejection times allowing adequate recovery periods, implementing fallback logic providing degraded functionality when circuits open, monitoring circuit breaker metrics alerting on threshold violations, testing failure scenarios validating circuit breaker behavior, combining with retry policies and timeouts, documenting circuit breaker configurations, and gradually tuning based on actual failure patterns. Organizations should identify critical dependencies requiring circuit breakers, implement consistently across services, monitor effectiveness, and establish runbooks for circuit breaker events. Circuit breakers work with other resilience patterns like retries, timeouts, and bulkheads providing comprehensive failure handling. App Mesh uses Envoy proxy automatically injected into service containers providing circuit breaking without application code changes. While circuit breakers prevent cascading failures, they don’t fix underlying issues requiring separate monitoring and incident response. AWS Step Functions is incorrect because while Step Functions orchestrates workflows with error handling, it doesn’t provide circuit breaker pattern for service-to-service communication. Amazon SQS is incorrect because SQS provides message queuing for asynchronous communication but doesn’t implement circuit breaker pattern for synchronous service calls. Amazon EventBridge is incorrect because EventBridge routes events between services but doesn’t provide circuit breaker functionality.
Q175
A developer is building a serverless API that needs to validate request payloads before processing. Where should validation be implemented?
A) In Lambda function code
B) Using API Gateway request validation
C) In client application
D) Using CloudFront functions
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question addresses input validation in serverless architectures. Understanding API Gateway request validation helps developers implement efficient input checking. API Gateway request validation should be used to validate request payloads before processing, providing early validation that rejects invalid requests without invoking backend Lambda functions. API Gateway can validate requests against defined JSON Schema models checking required parameters, data types, format patterns, and constraints. This reduces Lambda invocations for invalid requests lowering costs and improving performance. Request validation occurs at API Gateway before Lambda invocation returning 400 Bad Request for invalid payloads with detailed error messages. Configuration involves creating models defining JSON Schema for request payloads, attaching models to API methods specifying expected request body structure, enabling request validation on methods, defining required parameters, and optionally validating query strings and headers. Models specify data types, required fields, allowed values, string patterns, numeric ranges, and nested object structures. Benefits include reduced Lambda invocations and costs by filtering invalid requests early, improved performance avoiding backend processing for bad input, better error messages helping clients correct requests, centralized validation logic separate from business logic, and consistent validation across API methods. Common validations include required field checking, data type enforcement, format validation for emails or dates, range checking for numbers, string length limits, and enum value restrictions. Best practices include defining comprehensive models covering all validation requirements, providing meaningful error messages guiding clients, validating both request bodies and parameters, implementing defense in depth with additional validation in Lambda for critical checks, testing validation thoroughly with valid and invalid inputs, documenting expected formats for API consumers, versioning models as APIs evolve, and monitoring validation failures identifying common client errors. Organizations should standardize validation approaches, create reusable model libraries, implement client-side validation for better user experience while maintaining server-side validation, and balance thoroughness with maintainability. API Gateway validation handles common cases while Lambda implements business rule validation and complex logic. While API Gateway validation is efficient, Lambda validation is still recommended for defense in depth, complex business rules, and scenarios where detailed context is needed. In Lambda function code is incorrect because while Lambda should validate for defense in depth, implementing all validation in Lambda wastes invocations and costs for invalid requests that API Gateway could reject. In client application is incorrect because client-side validation improves user experience but never replaces server-side validation as clients can be bypassed. Using CloudFront functions is incorrect because CloudFront functions modify requests/responses at edge locations but API Gateway is appropriate layer for request validation.
Q176
A developer needs to execute code in response to modifications of objects in an S3 bucket. The code must run within milliseconds. Which solution provides the LOWEST latency?
A) Lambda function with S3 event notification
B) Lambda function polling S3
C) EC2 instance with cron job
D) Lambda@Edge function
Answer: A
Explanation:
This question tests understanding of event-driven architectures and latency requirements. Knowledge of S3 event notifications helps developers implement near real-time processing. Lambda function with S3 event notification provides the lowest latency for executing code in response to S3 object modifications, typically triggering within milliseconds to seconds of object events. S3 event notifications directly invoke Lambda functions asynchronously when specified events occur without polling delays or scheduling gaps. When objects are created, deleted, or restored, S3 immediately sends notifications triggering Lambda executions. This push model ensures minimal delay between event occurrence and processing start. Lambda cold starts may add latency for first invocation but subsequent invocations using warm containers execute quickly. Configuration involves enabling S3 event notifications on bucket, specifying event types to monitor, defining filters for object key patterns, configuring Lambda as destination, granting S3 permission to invoke Lambda, and implementing processing logic in function. Event details include bucket name, object key, size, and metadata enabling Lambda to process or retrieve objects. Benefits include near real-time processing with minimal latency, automatic scaling for concurrent events, no polling overhead or costs, serverless architecture with no infrastructure management, and simple configuration through S3 notification settings. Common use cases include image thumbnail generation immediately after upload, data validation and processing, metadata extraction, triggering workflows, and real-time analytics pipelines. Best practices include implementing idempotent functions handling potential duplicate events, using S3 metadata to track processing state, handling large objects appropriately considering Lambda memory and timeout limits, implementing error handling and retries, monitoring function executions and errors, considering concurrent execution limits, using Lambda@Edge for edge processing when needed, and testing with various object sizes and types. Organizations should design for scale as S3 can generate many events quickly, implement proper error handling, monitor processing latency, and optimize Lambda configurations including memory and timeout. Lambda functions should complete quickly or trigger asynchronous processing for long operations. S3 event notifications provide reliable low-latency triggering making them ideal for real-time object processing. Lambda function polling S3 is incorrect because polling introduces delays based on polling frequency, increases costs with continuous polling, and has higher latency than event notifications. EC2 instance with cron job is incorrect because scheduled jobs run at intervals not immediately after events with significant latency between object creation and processing. Lambda@Edge function is incorrect because Lambda@Edge executes at CloudFront edge locations for content delivery scenarios, not for S3 bucket object modifications.
Q177
A developer is implementing a microservice that needs to call another microservice. Which approach provides loose coupling between services?
A) Direct HTTP calls between services
B) Shared database between services
C) Message queue between services
D) Direct function invocation
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question addresses microservices design patterns and loose coupling. Understanding asynchronous messaging helps developers build resilient distributed systems. Message queue between services provides loose coupling by enabling asynchronous communication where services interact through messages without direct dependencies. Services send messages to queues without knowing about consumers, and consuming services process messages independently without knowing about producers. This decoupling allows services to evolve independently, scale separately, and handle failures gracefully. Message queues like Amazon SQS buffer messages between services, ensuring delivery even when consumers are temporarily unavailable, supporting different processing speeds, and enabling multiple consumers. Implementation involves producer service sending messages to queue containing necessary data and context, consumer service polling queue retrieving and processing messages, implementing idempotent processing handling duplicate messages, deleting messages after successful processing, and handling errors with retries or dead letter queues. Benefits include independent deployment of services without coordinated releases, independent scaling with services processing at their own rates, fault tolerance with messages persisting when consumers are down, flexibility with multiple consumers processing messages differently, and simplified error handling through retry mechanisms. Common patterns include command messages triggering actions, event messages notifying about changes, request-reply patterns with temporary queues, and publish-subscribe with fanout. Best practices include designing messages with necessary context avoiding service calls during processing, implementing idempotent consumers handling duplicate message delivery, using dead letter queues for messages failing repeatedly, monitoring queue depth identifying processing bottlenecks, implementing circuit breakers for downstream calls from consumers, versioning message schemas allowing backward compatibility, documenting message contracts between services, and testing failure scenarios. Organizations should standardize messaging patterns, implement observability across service boundaries, design for eventual consistency, and document service dependencies. Message queues enable temporal decoupling where services operate at different times and speed decoupling where they process at different rates. Asynchronous messaging fits many scenarios though synchronous communication remains appropriate when immediate responses are required. Direct HTTP calls between services is incorrect because direct calls create tight coupling with hard dependencies, synchronous communication requiring both services available simultaneously, and cascading failures when dependencies fail. Shared database between services is incorrect because sharing databases is anti-pattern in microservices creating tight coupling through shared schema, preventing independent deployment, and violating service boundaries. Direct function invocation is incorrect because directly invoking functions creates tight coupling similar to HTTP calls with hard dependencies between services.
Q178
A developer needs to ensure a Lambda function has consistent performance without cold starts. What should be configured?
A) Reserved concurrency
B) Provisioned concurrency
C) Increased memory allocation
D) Increased timeout
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question addresses Lambda performance optimization. Understanding provisioned concurrency helps developers eliminate cold start latency for latency-sensitive applications. Provisioned concurrency should be configured to ensure Lambda function has consistent performance without cold starts by keeping specified number of function instances initialized and ready to respond immediately. Lambda normally creates new execution environments on demand during scaling causing cold starts with initialization latency. Cold starts include downloading code, starting runtime, executing initialization code, and setting up networking. For latency-sensitive applications like APIs, mobile backends, or real-time processing, cold starts degrade user experience. Provisioned concurrency eliminates cold starts by maintaining warm execution environments continuously. Configuration involves enabling provisioned concurrency on function version or alias, specifying number of concurrent instances to keep warm, optionally implementing Application Auto Scaling adjusting provisioned concurrency based on schedules or metrics, and monitoring utilization optimizing costs. Provisioned instances remain initialized even during idle periods incurring costs but providing consistent low-latency responses. Benefits include elimination of cold start latency for provisioned instances, predictable performance for latency-sensitive workloads, immediate availability for traffic spikes within provisioned capacity, and ability to schedule scaling anticipating traffic patterns. Common use cases include production APIs requiring consistent response times, mobile app backends where user experience matters, trading platforms needing immediate execution, and any application with strict latency SLAs. Challenges include cost as provisioned concurrency charges for configured capacity regardless of usage, determining appropriate provisioned level balancing cost and performance, and monitoring utilization avoiding over-provisioning. Best practices include analyzing traffic patterns determining peak concurrency needs, using Application Auto Scaling scheduling provisioned concurrency for known patterns, monitoring utilization and throttling metrics, starting conservatively with lower provisioned concurrency, gradually increasing based on actual demand, combining provisioned concurrency with reserved concurrency limiting maximum concurrent executions, implementing gradual deployments for provisioned versions, testing under load verifying performance, and documenting cost-performance tradeoffs. Organizations should identify latency-sensitive functions, implement provisioned concurrency selectively, monitor costs versus benefits, and optimize configurations. Provisioned concurrency is powerful but expensive requiring judicious use. For functions tolerating occasional cold starts, default on-demand scaling is cost-effective. Reserved concurrency is incorrect because reserved concurrency limits maximum concurrent executions guaranteeing capacity but doesn’t keep instances warm or eliminate cold starts. Increased memory allocation is incorrect because while more memory improves performance and reduces cold start time, it doesn’t eliminate cold starts. Increased timeout is incorrect because timeout controls maximum execution duration not affecting cold start initialization.
Q179
A developer is building an application that processes images uploaded to S3. The processing takes 30 minutes per image. What is the BEST solution?
A) Lambda function with 30-minute timeout
B) Step Functions coordinating multiple Lambda functions
C) ECS task for long-running processing
D) Elastic Beanstalk application
Answer: C
Explanation:
This question addresses selecting appropriate compute services for workload characteristics. Understanding compute service limitations helps developers choose optimal solutions. ECS task for long-running processing is the best solution for 30-minute image processing as Lambda has 15-minute maximum timeout making it unsuitable for longer operations. Amazon ECS (Elastic Container Service) runs Docker containers with no time limits supporting hours-long or continuous processing. For long-running image processing, ECS provides flexible compute platform with full control over execution environment. Implementation involves containerizing image processing application packaging dependencies and code, creating ECS task definition specifying container image, resource requirements, and configuration, setting up ECS cluster with appropriate instance types or Fargate for serverless containers, triggering ECS tasks from S3 events using Lambda, EventBridge, or Step Functions, implementing processing logic with access to S3 for input and output, and monitoring task execution and failures. Benefits include no time limits supporting any duration processing, flexible resource allocation with appropriate CPU and memory, full runtime control installing required libraries and tools, cost-effective pricing for long-running tasks, and container portability. Common architecture uses S3 event notification triggering Lambda function that starts ECS task to process image. ECS task runs processing, stores results in S3, and terminates. Fargate simplifies by eliminating cluster management. Best practices include right-sizing tasks with appropriate CPU and memory for processing, implementing checkpointing for very long processes enabling resume after failures, using Spot instances for cost optimization when timing flexibility exists, monitoring task execution with CloudWatch Container Insights, implementing proper error handling and retries, cleaning up resources after completion, logging processing progress, and considering batch job orchestration for multiple images. Organizations should select compute services matching workload characteristics, understand service limitations and costs, implement appropriate monitoring, and optimize resource utilization. Lambda is excellent for short-duration event-driven processing but ECS suits longer workloads. Step Functions can orchestrate Lambda functions but can’t extend individual function timeouts beyond 15 minutes. Lambda function with 30-minute timeout is incorrect because Lambda maximum timeout is 15 minutes making 30-minute processing impossible. Step Functions coordinating multiple Lambda functions is incorrect because while Step Functions orchestrates workflows, splitting 30-minute processing across Lambda functions adds complexity and may not be feasible depending on processing nature. Elastic Beanstalk application is incorrect because while Beanstalk supports long-running applications, ECS provides better fit for event-driven container-based processing.
Q180
A developer needs to store application logs centrally from multiple Lambda functions. Which AWS service should be used?
A) Amazon S3
B) Amazon CloudWatch Logs
C) Amazon DynamoDB
D) Amazon RDS
Answer: B
Explanation:
This question tests understanding of logging services in AWS. Knowledge of CloudWatch Logs helps developers implement centralized log management. Amazon CloudWatch Logs should be used to store application logs centrally from multiple Lambda functions, providing native integration, automatic log ingestion, and comprehensive log management capabilities. Lambda automatically sends all console output from functions to CloudWatch Logs creating log streams for each function execution. This integration requires no configuration as Lambda has built-in CloudWatch Logs permissions. CloudWatch Logs organizes logs hierarchically with log groups containing related log streams, typically with one log group per Lambda function and log streams per invocation or time period. Implementation involves using console.log (Node.js), print (Python), or equivalent in function code for logging, accessing logs through CloudWatch Logs console or API, creating log insights queries for analysis, setting retention periods controlling storage duration and costs, optionally streaming logs to other services like S3, Elasticsearch, or Kinesis, and implementing structured logging for better parsing. Benefits include automatic log collection with zero configuration, centralized access to logs from all functions, powerful query capabilities using CloudWatch Logs Insights, real-time log streaming and monitoring, metric filters creating custom metrics from log patterns, integration with alarms for log-based alerting, and retention management controlling costs. Common practices include structured logging using JSON format enabling better parsing and filtering, appropriate log levels balancing verbosity with relevance, meaningful log messages aiding troubleshooting, correlation IDs linking related log entries across functions, log sampling for high-volume debugging, and security considerations avoiding logging sensitive data. Best practices include implementing consistent logging patterns across functions, using appropriate log retention periods balancing compliance with costs, creating metric filters for important events and errors, setting alarms for critical log patterns, implementing log aggregation queries spanning multiple functions, considering log export to S3 for long-term archival, encrypting logs containing sensitive information, using log insights for troubleshooting and analysis, and monitoring log ingestion volumes managing costs. Organizations should establish logging standards, implement centralized log analysis, create dashboards visualizing important metrics derived from logs, and maintain log retention policies. CloudWatch Logs provides powerful capabilities but generates costs based on ingestion and storage making thoughtful logging important. Lambda integrates seamlessly with CloudWatch Logs making it natural choice for Lambda logging. Amazon S3 is incorrect because while logs can be exported to S3 for archival, CloudWatch Logs provides better real-time access, searching, and monitoring capabilities for active logging. Amazon DynamoDB is incorrect because DynamoDB is database for structured data not designed for log storage and analysis. Amazon RDS is incorrect because RDS provides relational databases not suitable for unstructured log data requiring different access patterns.
