Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location PL
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Amazon Exam SOA-C02 Topic 10 Question 86 Discussion

Actual exam question for Amazon's SOA-C02 exam
Question #: 86
Topic #: 10
[All SOA-C02 Questions]

A SysOps Administrator is managing a web application that runs on Amazon EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB). The instances run in an

EC2 Auto Scaling group. The administrator wants to set an alarm for when all target instances associated with the ALB are unhealthy.

Which condition should be used with the alarm?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

To meet the requirements of the workload, a company should store the data in an Amazon S3 Glacier vault and configure a vault lock policy for write-once, read-many (WORM) access. This will ensure that the data is stored securely and cannot be edited in the future. The other solutions (storing the data in an Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volume and configuring AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) encryption, storing the data in Amazon S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) and configuring server-side encryption, or storing the data in Amazon S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) and configuring multi-factor authentication (MFA)) will not meet the requirements, as they do not provide a way to protect the audit logs from future edits.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/zh_tw/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/object-lock.html


by Nana at Mar 06, 2024, 08:36 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium SOA-C02 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Hui
5 days ago
Haha, option C is just completely off the mark. Checking for EC2 status check failures has nothing to do with the health of the instances behind the ALB. The question is clearly asking about the ALB, not the underlying EC2 instances.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brent
6 days ago
I'm torn between A and B, but I think B is the better choice. Checking for a healthy host count of 0 might be a bit too specific, whereas checking for any unhealthy hosts is a more generic and reliable approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lenita
10 days ago
Definitely go with option B. Checking for unhealthy hosts makes the most sense here, as we want to be alerted when all the instances behind the ALB are unhealthy.
upvoted 0 times
...
Joesph
13 days ago
But if all target instances are unhealthy, wouldn't the count of unhealthy hosts be greater than or equal to 1?
upvoted 0 times
...
Fernanda
15 days ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is A) AWS/ApplicationELB HealthyHostCount <= 0.
upvoted 0 times
...
Joesph
23 days ago
I think the answer is B) AWS/ApplicationELB UnhealthyHostCount >= 1.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77