A company stores datasets in JSON format and .csv format in an Amazon S3 bucket. The company has Amazon RDS for Microsoft SQL Server databases, Amazon DynamoDB tables that are in provisionedcapacity mode, and an Amazon Redshift cluster. A data engineering team must develop a solution that will give data scientists the ability to query all data sources by using syntax similar to SQL.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Correct Answer:
A
The best solution to meet the requirements of giving data scientists the ability to query all data sources by using syntax similar to SQL with the least operational overhead is to use AWS Glue to crawl the data sources, store metadata in the AWS Glue Data Catalog, use Amazon Athena to query the data, use SQL for structured data sources, and use PartiQL for data that is stored in JSON format.
AWS Glue is a serverless data integration service that makes it easy to prepare, clean, enrich, and move data between data stores1. AWS Glue crawlers are processes that connect to a data store, progress through a prioritized list of classifiers to determine the schema for your data, and then create metadata tables in the Data Catalog2. The Data Catalog is a persistent metadata store that contains table definitions, job definitions, and other control information to help you manage your AWS Glue components3. You can use AWS Glue to crawl the data sources, such as Amazon S3, Amazon RDS for Microsoft SQL Server, and Amazon DynamoDB, and store the metadata in the Data Catalog.
Amazon Athena is a serverless, interactive query service that makes it easy to analyze data directly in Amazon S3 using standard SQL or Python4. Amazon Athena also supports PartiQL, a SQL-compatible query language that lets you query, insert, update, and delete data from semi-structured and nested data, such as JSON. You can use Amazon Athena to query the data from the Data Catalog using SQL for structured data sources, such as .csv files and relational databases, and PartiQL for data that is stored in JSON format. You can also use Athena to query data from other data sources, such as Amazon Redshift, using federated queries.
Using AWS Glue and Amazon Athena to query all data sources by using syntax similar to SQL is the least operational overhead solution, as you do not need to provision, manage, or scale any infrastructure, and you pay only for the resources you use. AWS Glue charges you based on the compute time and the data processed by your crawlers and ETL jobs1. Amazon Athena charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries. You can also reduce the cost and improve the performance of your queries by using compression, partitioning, and columnar formats for your data in Amazon S3.
Option B is not the best solution, as using AWS Glue to crawl the data sources, store metadata in the AWS Glue Data Catalog, and use Redshift Spectrum to query the data, would incur more costs and complexity than using Amazon Athena. Redshift Spectrum is a feature of Amazon Redshift, a fully managed data warehouse service, that allows you to query and join data across your data warehouse and your data lake using standard SQL. While Redshift Spectrum is powerful and useful for many data warehousing scenarios, it is not necessary or cost-effective for querying all data sources by using syntax similar to SQL. Redshift Spectrum charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries, which is similar to Amazon Athena, but it also requires you to have an Amazon Redshift cluster, which charges you based on the node type, the number of nodes, and the duration of the cluster5. These costs can add up quickly, especially if you have large volumes of data and complex queries. Moreover, using Redshift Spectrum would introduce additional latency and complexity, as you would have to provision and manage the cluster, and create an external schema and database for the data in the Data Catalog, instead of querying it directly from Amazon Athena.
Option C is not the best solution, as using AWS Glue to crawl the data sources, store metadata in the AWS Glue Data Catalog, use AWS Glue jobs to transform data that is in JSON format to Apache Parquet or .csv format, store the transformed data in an S3 bucket, and use Amazon Athena to query the original and transformed data from the S3 bucket, would incur more costs and complexity than using Amazon Athena with PartiQL. AWS Glue jobs are ETL scripts that you can write in Python or Scala to transform your data and load it to your target data store. Apache Parquet is a columnar storage format that can improve the performance of analytical queries by reducing the amount of data that needs to be scanned and providing efficient compression and encoding schemes6. While using AWS Glue jobs and Parquet can improve the performance and reduce the cost of your queries, they would also increase the complexity and the operational overhead of the data pipeline, as you would have to write, run, and monitor the ETL jobs, and store the transformed data in a separate location in Amazon S3. Moreover, using AWS Glue jobs and Parquet would introduce additional latency, as you would have to wait for the ETL jobs to finish before querying the transformed data.
Option D is not the best solution, as using AWS Lake Formation to create a data lake, use Lake Formation jobs to transform the data from all data sources to Apache Parquet format, store the transformed data in an S3 bucket, and use Amazon Athena or RedshiftSpectrum to query the data, would incur more costs and complexity than using Amazon Athena with PartiQL. AWS Lake Formation is a service that helps you centrally govern, secure, and globally share data for analytics and machine learning7. Lake Formation jobs are ETL jobs that you can create and run using the Lake Formation console or API. While using Lake Formation and Parquet can improve the performance and reduce the cost of your queries, they would also increase the complexity and the operational overhead of the data pipeline, as you would have to create, run, and monitor the Lake Formation jobs, and store the transformed data in a separate location in Amazon S3. Moreover, using Lake Formation and Parquet would introduce additional latency, as you would have to wait for the Lake Formation jobs to finish before querying the transformed data. Furthermore, using Redshift Spectrum to query the data would also incur the same costs and complexity as mentioned in option B. References:
✑ What is Amazon Athena?
✑ Data Catalog and crawlers in AWS Glue
✑ AWS Glue Data Catalog
✑ Columnar Storage Formats
✑ AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide
✑ AWS Glue Schema Registry
✑ What is AWS Glue?
✑ Amazon Redshift Serverless
✑ Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters
✑ [Querying external data using Amazon Redshift Spectrum]
✑ [Using stored procedures in Amazon Redshift]
✑ [What is AWS Lambda?]
✑ [PartiQL for Amazon Athena]
✑ [Federated queries in Amazon Athena]
✑ [Amazon Athena pricing]
✑ [Top 10 performance tuning tips for Amazon Athena]
✑ [AWS Glue ETL jobs]
✑ [AWS Lake Formation jobs]
A company uses Amazon S3 to store semi-structured data in a transactional data lake. Some of the data files are small, but other data files are tens of terabytes.
A data engineer must perform a change data capture (CDC) operation to identify changed data from the data source. The data source sends a full snapshot as a JSON file every day and ingests the changed data into the data lake.
Which solution will capture the changed data MOST cost-effectively?
Correct Answer:
C
An open source data lake format, such as Apache Parquet, Apache ORC, or Delta Lake, is a cost-effective way to perform a change data capture (CDC) operation on semi-structured data stored in Amazon S3. An open source data lake format allows you to query data directly from S3 using standard SQL, without the need to move or copy data to another service. An open source data lake format also supports schema evolution, meaning it can handle changes in the data structure over time. An open source data lake format also supports upserts, meaning it can insert new data and update existing data in the same operation, using a merge command. This way, you can efficiently capture the changes from the data source and apply them to the S3 data lake, without duplicating or losing any data. The other options are not as cost-effective as using an open source data lake format, as they involve additional steps or costs. Option A requires you to create and maintain an AWS Lambda function, which can be complex and error-prone. AWS Lambda also has some limits on the execution time, memory, and concurrency, which can affect the performance and reliability of the CDC operation. Option B and D require you to ingest the data into a relational database service, such as Amazon RDS or Amazon Aurora, which can be expensive and unnecessary for semi-structured data. AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) can write the changed data to the data lake, but it alsocharges you for the data replication and transfer. Additionally, AWS DMS does not support JSON as a source data type, so you would need to convert the data to a supported format before using AWS DMS. References:
✑ What is a data lake?
✑ Choosing a data format for your data lake
✑ Using the MERGE INTO command in Delta Lake
✑ [AWS Lambda quotas]
✑ [AWS Database Migration Service quotas]
A data engineer must build an extract, transform, and load (ETL) pipeline to process and load data from 10 source systems into 10 tables that are in an Amazon Redshift database. All the source systems generate .csv, JSON, or Apache Parquet files every 15 minutes. The source systems all deliver files into one Amazon S3 bucket. The file sizes range from 10 MB to 20 GB. The ETL pipeline must function correctly despite changes to the data schema.
Which data pipeline solutions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Correct Answer:
AB
Using an Amazon EventBridge rule to run an AWS Glue job or invoke an AWS Glue workflow job every 15 minutes are two possible solutions that will meet the requirements. AWS Glue is a serverless ETL service that can process and load data from various sources to various targets, including Amazon Redshift. AWS Glue can handle different data formats, such as CSV, JSON, and Parquet, and also support schema evolution, meaning it can adapt to changes in the data schema over time. AWS Glue can also leverage Apache Spark to perform distributed processing and transformation of large datasets. AWS Glue integrates with Amazon EventBridge, which is a serverless event bus service that can trigger actions based on rules and schedules. By using an Amazon EventBridge rule, you can invoke an AWS Glue job or workflow every 15 minutes, and configure the job or workflow to run an AWS Glue crawler and then load the data into the Amazon Redshift tables. This way, you can build a cost-effective and scalable ETL pipeline that can handle data from 10 source systems and function correctly despite changes to the data schema.
The other options are not solutions that will meet the requirements. Option C, configuring an AWS Lambda function to invoke an AWS Glue crawler when a file is loaded into the S3 bucket, and creating a second Lambda function to run the AWS Glue job, is not a feasible solution, as it would require a lot of Lambda invocations andcoordination. AWS Lambda has some limits on the execution time, memory, and concurrency, which can affect the performance and reliability of the ETL pipeline. Option D, configuring an AWS Lambda function to invoke an AWS Glue workflow when a file is loaded into the S3 bucket, is not a necessary solution, as you can use an Amazon EventBridge rule to invoke the AWS Glue workflow directly, without the need for a Lambda function. Option E, configuring an AWS Lambda function to invoke an AWS Glue job when a file is loaded into the S3 bucket, and configuring the AWS Glue job to put smaller partitions of the DataFrame into an Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream, is not a cost-effective solution, as it would incur additional costs for Lambda invocations and data delivery. Moreover, using Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose to load data into Amazon Redshift is not suitable for frequent and small batches of data, as it can cause performance issues and data fragmentation. References:
✑ AWS Glue
✑ Amazon EventBridge
✑ Using AWS Glue to run ETL jobs against non-native JDBC data sources
✑ [AWS Lambda quotas]
✑ [Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose quotas]
A company uses an on-premises Microsoft SQL Server database to store financial transaction data. The company migrates the transaction data from the on-premises database to AWS at the end of each month. The company has noticed that the cost to migrate data from the on-premises database to an Amazon RDS for SQL Server database has increased recently.
The company requires a cost-effective solution to migrate the data to AWS. The solution must cause minimal downtown for the applications that access the database.
Which AWS service should the company use to meet these requirements?
Correct Answer:
B
AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) is a cloud service that makes it possible to migrate relational databases, data warehouses, NoSQL databases, and other types of data stores to AWS quickly, securely, and with minimal downtime and zero data loss1. AWS DMS supports migration between 20-plus database and analytics engines, such as Microsoft SQL Server to Amazon RDS for SQL Server2. AWS DMS takes overmany of the difficult or tedious tasks involved in a migration project, such as capacity analysis, hardware and software procurement, installation and administration, testing and debugging, and ongoing replication and monitoring1. AWS DMS is a cost-effective solution, as you only pay for the compute resources and additional log storage used during the migration process2. AWS DMS is the best solution for the company to migrate the financial transaction data from the on-premises Microsoft SQL Server database to AWS, as it meets the requirements of minimal downtime, zero data loss, and low cost.
Option A is not the best solution, as AWS Lambda is a serverless compute service that lets you run code without provisioning or managing servers, but it does not provide any built-in features for database migration. You would have to write your own code to extract, transform, and load the data from the source to the target, which would increase the operational overhead and complexity.
Option C is not the best solution, as AWS Direct Connect is a service that establishes a dedicated network connection from your premises to AWS, but it does not provide any built-in features for database migration. You would still need to use another service or tool to perform the actual data transfer, which would increase the cost and complexity.
Option D is not the best solution, as AWS DataSync is a service that makes it easy to transfer data between on-premises storage systems and AWS storage services, such as Amazon S3, Amazon EFS, and Amazon FSx for Windows File Server, but it does not support Amazon RDS for SQL Server as a target. You would have to use another service or tool to migrate the data from Amazon S3 to Amazon RDS for SQL Server, which would increase the latency and complexity. References:
✑ Database Migration - AWS Database Migration Service - AWS
✑ What is AWS Database Migration Service?
✑ AWS Database Migration Service Documentation
✑ AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide
A company receives .csv files that contain physical address data. The data is in columns that have the following names: Door_No, Street_Name, City, and Zip_Code. The company wants to create a single column to store these values in the following format:
Which solution will meet this requirement with the LEAST coding effort?
Correct Answer:
B
The NEST TO MAP transformation allows you to combine multiple columns into a single column that contains a JSON object with key-value pairs. This is the easiest way to achieve the desired format for the physical address data, as you can simply select the columns to nest and specify the keys for each column. The NEST TO ARRAY transformation creates a single column that contains an array of values, which is not thesame as the JSON object format. The PIVOT transformation reshapes the data by creating new columns from unique values in a selected column, which is not applicable for this use case. Writing a Lambda function in Python requires more coding effort than using AWS Glue DataBrew, which provides a visual and interactive interface for data transformations. References:
✑ 7 most common data preparation transformations in AWS Glue DataBrew (Section: Nesting and unnesting columns)
✑ NEST TO MAP - AWS Glue DataBrew (Section: Syntax)
