Exam Professional Cloud Architect topic 12 question 1 discussion

Why do we need to put NAS data on persistant disk and not on GCS ? I would go with D!

I prefer D. Original NAS is for image, log, backup. GCS fits it perfectly.

A - no, MySQL (relational) to Datastore (document-oriented) is not a good idea B - no, because Hadoop to BigQuery C - NAS is currently 65 TB ("100 TB total storage; 35 TB available") for image storage, logs, backups, so with "10 times its size in data that mirrors the existing patterns of usage" would be 650 TB. A look to https://cloud.google.com/architecture/storage-advisor?hl=en#comparative_analysis says, it's too big for Persistent Disk. Also a replacement for NAS would be Filestore. D - I would choose this, even if it is an application change. Who knows if it is major. But it can have a good ROI, because Cloud Storage can be cheaper.

Because min change

Because min change

Use case suitability: Cloud Storage: Ideally suited for storing large, unstructured data like images, videos, and backups, which is likely the case for Dress4Win's NAS data. Persistent Disk: More appropriate for frequently accessed data that requires block-level access, such as databases or operating systems for virtual machines.

Correct Ans: A NAS `" image storage, logs, backups : for storing images, logs and backups Cloud Storage is best practice and cost effective also.

Should be D

Voting c NAS could have been replaced with file store to minimize any change, moving to GCS is not that easy change in overall architecture

C, because we can run some script on NAS. It can act like a normal server. But GCS cannot.

without making major application changes and still maximize the ROI --> compute engine with persistent disk. without knowing access patterns, GCS may not be an easy change.

you don't need NAS to store archive and Image disk

D is the correct chand equivalent mapping

D is OK https://cloud.google.com/architecture/filers-on-compute-engine?hl=en#managed_file_storage_solutions

SAN -> persistent disk, NAS -> Cloud Storage

Managed Instances With Tomcat and Nginx would bring the minimum necessary tweaking to the new environment. Migrating from MySql to Cloud SQL does not require any syntax changes. Moving from Rabbit MQ to Pub/Sub is relatively straightforward and has very complete documentation. DataProc has Libraries and tools to ensure Apache Hadoop interoperability. Without many changes in the environment, mainly keeping the original architecture, Datastorage will keep the presentation characteristics of a shared area, mapped to the instances.

The answer should be C. 'A' and 'B' are ruled out as they introduce significant architecture changes. or irrelevant. 'D' is fine except proposes to replace NAS with Cloud Storage. This will introduce major architectural changes. Instead, if the choice was to move 'NAS' to 'Cloud Filestore' then it would have made sense. Answer 'C' is the closest with the least amount of architectural changes involved in migration.