Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 topic 1 question 7 discussion

B. Upload the container images to Amazon Elastic Container Registry (Amazon ECR). Configure two auto scaled Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) clusters with the Fargate launch type to handle the expected load. Deploy tasks from the ECR images. Configure two separate Application Load Balancers to direct traffic to the ECS clusters. This option meets the requirement of using a serverless architecture by utilizing the Fargate launch type for the ECS clusters, which allows for automatic scaling of the containers based on the expected load. It also allows for separate deployments for production and testing by configuring separate ECS clusters and Application Load Balancers for each environment. This option also minimizes operational complexity by utilizing ECS and Fargate for the container orchestration and scaling.

Answer is A. ABC all works but A is most COST EFFECTIVE

"microservices that run on containers, with a serverless architecture that minimizes operational complexity and costs" = Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)

Serverless and Most Cost-Effective Solutions - B

Choosing A, Fargate had a minimum charge per minute. Lambda is per invocation. So lambda Is probably cheaper in THIS case

Option B is the most cost-effective solution for the following reasons: The use of Fargate, a serverless compute engine for containers, eliminates the need for managing and scaling the underlying infrastructure. This minimizes operational complexity and reduces costs as the resources are used only when required. Auto scaling ensures that the application scales up and down based on the load, providing the required performance and availability without incurring additional costs. Amazon ECS is a simpler and more cost-effective solution than Amazon EKS, which requires more management and additional resources to operate the Kubernetes control plane. Using Application Load Balancers to direct traffic to the ECS clusters ensures high availability and fault tolerance.

Explanation: Amazon ECS with Fargate: By uploading the container images to Amazon ECR and using Amazon ECS with the Fargate launch type, you can run the microservices in containers without having to manage the underlying infrastructure. Fargate automatically scales the containers based on the load. Separate Production and Testing Environments: With two separate auto-scaled Amazon ECS clusters, you can have dedicated environments for production and testing, ensuring isolation and allowing for separate deployments and configurations. Application Load Balancers (ALB): Configuring two separate ALBs allows you to direct traffic to the appropriate ECS clusters. This ensures proper routing of requests between the production and testing environments. Option B provides a cost-effective solution by utilizing the serverless nature of Fargate, which eliminates the need to provision and manage EC2 instances explicitly. It also allows for separate environments, easy scalability, and traffic routing using ALBs, providing flexibility and minimizing operational complexity.

Option A - This option might not work. AWS Lambda provides a cheap option to run containers however nothing is said about execution times could be a concern, i.e. AWS Lambda only provides 15 minutes of execution time Option B - This option will work. ALB, ECR, ECS and Fargate in combination will deliver a running solution. Option C - This option will work. ALB, ECR, EKS and Fargate will deliver a running solution. Option D - This option will work: Beanstalk will rely on ECS to run the containers. See https://docs.aws.amazon.com/elasticbeanstalk/latest/dg/create_deploy_docker_ecs.html Cheapest option is B.

B. Upload the container images to Amazon Elastic Container Registry (Amazon ECR). Configure two auto scaled Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) clusters with the Fargate launch type to handle the expected load. Deploy tasks from the ECR images. Configure two separate Application Load Balancers to direct traffic to the ECS clusters.

A because ALB & Beanstalk are not serverless & Lambda added support to use docker images directly. you can upload container images to AWS Lambda and use them as functions. AWS Lambda introduced support for deploying functions as container images, allowing you to package and deploy Lambda functions with custom runtimes, libraries, and dependencies that might exceed the limitations of traditional Lambda deployment packages (zip files).

NOT B and C, because ALB is not serverless architecture NOT D, because Beantalk is not serverless architecture A is also most effective

A - COST EFFECTIVE (lambda is only solution where users pay by invocation)

Once choose eks,do not config load balance manually

Option B and NOT Option C: I wasn't able to find a good comparison btw AWS ECS vs AWS EKS pricing in AWS documentation however I found a few articles saying that AWS EKS has additional cost for using EKS control plane. I will leave it up to you to decide. https://www.densify.com/eks-best-practices/aws-ecs-vs-eks/

AWS Elastic Beanstalk is not considered a serverless architecture. While it abstracts away some of the underlying infrastructure management, it still involves running and managing EC2 instances, which are virtual servers.

D - because BCD are right solution , D because - beanstalk runs ECS in backend + Reduce operation complexity which is asked in the question

The confusion here is choice between B and C. Both ECS and EKS are container orchestration service which supports fargate. But ECS is aws fully managed, better suited for simple application and also more cost effective.