Find answers, ask questions, and connect with our
community around the world.

Home Forums AWS AWS Certified Solutions Architect Associate Category: CSAA – Design Cost-Optimized Architectures

  • Category: CSAA – Design Cost-Optimized Architectures

  • Denzil77777

    Member
    April 1, 2024 at 9:34 pm

    <div>In the below question and answer, if Kinesis Data Streams, were already in place, why would the solution which is in place already, be replaced with Amazon SQS queue?</div>

    Further;

    (a) Isn’t this an additional time to reconfigure, including and create Lambda Functions?

    (b) What happens to the live, business impact, when changing from Kineses Data Streams to SNS?

    Is it to do with cost?

    Category: CSAA – Design Cost-Optimized Architectures

    A company is building an internal application that serves as a repository for images uploaded by a couple of users. Whenever a user uploads an image, it would be sent to Kinesis Data Streams for processing before it is stored in an S3 bucket. If the upload was successful, the application will return a prompt informing the user that the operation was successful. The entire processing typically takes about 5 minutes to finish.

    Which of the following options will allow you to asynchronously process the request to the application from upload request to Kinesis, S3, and return a reply in the most cost-effective manner?

    <div>
    </div>

    (1) Use a combination of SQS to queue the requests and then asynchronously process them using On-Demand EC2 Instances.

    (2)
    Use a combination of Lambda and Step Functions to orchestrate service
    components and asynchronously process the requests.

    (3) Replace the Kinesis Data Streams with an Amazon SQS queue. Create a
    Lambda function that will asynchronously process the requests.

    (4) Use a combination of SNS to buffer the requests and then asynchronously process them using On-Demand EC2 Instances.

    Kind Regards,

    Denzil

  • Neil-TutorialsDojo

    Member
    April 2, 2024 at 12:49 pm

    Hi Denzil,

    Thank you for posting here.

    Yes, Denzil, it has something to do with the cost. Switching from Kinesis to SQS might involve trade-offs (as you said, additional time to reconfigure, business impact, etc.) and considerations, but it could potentially lead to cost savings and simpler architecture for the given scenario.

    Additionally, as elaborated in the explanation, “Kinesis Data Streams is a real-time data streaming service that requires the provisioning of shards. Amazon SQS is a cheaper option because you only pay for what you use. Since there is no requirement for real-time processing in the scenario given, replacing Kinesis Data Streams with Amazon SQS would save more costs.”

    I hope this answers your question. If you have any more inquiries, don’t hesitate to ask.

    Regards,
    Neil @ Tutorials Dojo

  • Denzil77777

    Member
    April 2, 2024 at 4:07 pm

    Hello Neil,

    Thank you for clarifying, as I was struggling a bit, to understand, the AWS Services which were already in place and then why the change.

    It was a good explanation, elaborating, the usage of AWS Service for real time and none real time.

    Kind Regards,

    Denzil

Viewing 1 - 3 of 3 replies

Log in to reply.

Original Post
0 of 0 posts June 2018
Now