Exam Professional Data Engineer topic 1 question 300 discussion

Minimize cost. https://cloud.google.com/alloydb?hl=en AlloyDB offers superior performance, 4x faster than standard PostgreSQL for transactional workloads. That does not come without cost.

"support analytics needs" -> columnar storage -> AlloyDB

Cloud SQL natively supports PostgreSQL AlloyDB for PostgreSQL is a great option if you're specifically looking for high performance in both transactional and analytical workloads. However, it might be more complex and costly than Cloud SQL

B AlloyDB es la mejor opción para modernizar el entorno, mantener compatibilidad con PostgreSQL y manejar tanto cargas transaccionales como analíticas en un único sistema, minimizando costos y complejidad.

In real life clearly how performant it needed to be would be a massive factor. AlloyDB is more expensive (see https://cloud.google.com/alloydb/pricing, vs https://cloud.google.com/sql/pricing), but when they say "minimise cost" is that per query, or is it per year assuming similar instance size. There's no way for us to know, we have to guess. I'm guessing AlloyDB, as the question seem to be telegraphing that, but it could just as easily be CloudSQL postgres based on the cheaper costs. We simply cannot know.

Because AlloyDB is optimised for hybrid transactional and analytical processing (HTAP), meaning you can run both transactional workloads and analytics on the same database with excellent performance.

AlloyDB

It's a little complicated, considering it says minimize costs (Cloud SQL) and run transactional workloads and support analytics needs (AlloyDB). I consider B. because you can minimize costs in the long-term instead of doing it immediately with possible extra costs in the long-term. Think about it

AlloyDB is for large scale and more expensive. We want to minimize cost and complexity, so the answer is D.

B. Migrate your workloads to AlloyDB for PostgreSQL.

They currently have transactional data stored on-premises in a PostgreSQL database and they want to modernize their database that supports transactional workloads and analytics .If they select cloud Sql (postgreSQL) it will minimize the cost and complexity. and for analytics purpose they can create federated queries over cloudSql(postgreSql) https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs/federated-queries-intro This approach will minimze the cost

B - minimize cost Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL: Generally less expensive than AlloyDB, especially for smaller deployments. AlloyDB: Can be significantly more expensive due to its advanced features and high performance capabilities.

minimize cost and complexity

Considering the cost factor, I'll go with D. If "minimize cost" is not present in the question, then I'd go with 'B' AlloyDB. Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL: Generally less expensive than AlloyDB. AlloyDB: Can be significantly more expensive due to its advanced features and high performance capabilities.

AlloyDB for PostgreSQL is a fully managed, PostgreSQL-compatible database service that's designed for your most demanding workloads, including hybrid transactional and analytical processing. ref: https://cloud.google.com/alloydb/docs/overview

https://cloud.google.com/alloydb#all-features The requirement is to minimize cost and complexity. Cloud SQL would be the best choice.

Database Migration Service makes it easier for you to migrate your data to Google Cloud. This service helps you lift and shift your PostgreSQL workloads into Cloud SQL.