Free Practice Questions for Amazon Web Services Data-Engineer-Associate Exam

The company needs to load data warehouse tables into Amazon S3 and perform incremental synchronization with daily updates. The most efficient solution is to useAWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS)with a combination offull load and change data capture (CDC)to handle the initial load and daily incremental updates.

Option A: Use an AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) full load plus CDC job to load tables that contain monotonically increasing data columns from the on-premises data warehouse to Amazon S3. Use custom logic in AWS Glue to append the daily incremental data to a full-load copy that is in Amazon S3.DMS is designed to migrate databases to AWS, and the combination of full loadplus CDC is ideal for handling incremental data changes efficiently. AWS Glue can then be used to append the incremental data to the full data set in S3. This solution is highly operationally efficient because it automates both the full load and incremental updates.

Options B, C, and Dare less operationally efficient because they either require writing custom logic to handle bookmarks manually or involve unnecessary daily full loads.

AWS Data Exchange is a service that makes it easy to find, subscribe to, and use third-party data in the cloud. It provides a secure and reliable way to access and integrate data from various sources, such as data providers, public datasets, or AWS services. Using AWS Data Exchange, you can browse and subscribe to data products that suit your needs, and then use API calls or the AWS Management Console to export the data to Amazon S3, where you can use it with your existing analytics platform. This solution minimizes the effort and time required to incorporate third-party datasets, as you do not need to set up and manage data pipelines, storage, or access controls. You also benefit from the data quality and freshness provided by the data providers, who can update their data products as frequently as needed12.

The other options are not optimal for the following reasons:

B. Use API calls to access and integrate third-party datasets from AWS. This option is vague and does not specify which AWS service or feature is used to access and integrate third-party datasets. AWS offers a variety of services and features that can helpwith data ingestion, processing, and analysis, but not all of them are suitable for the given scenario. For example, AWS Glue is a serverless data integration service that can help you discover, prepare, and combine data from various sources, but it requires you to create and run data extraction, transformation, and loading (ETL) jobs, which can add operational overhead3.

C. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Streams to access and integrate third-party datasets from AWS CodeCommit repositories. This option is not feasible, as AWS CodeCommit is a source control service that hosts secure Git-based repositories, not a data source that can be accessed by Amazon Kinesis Data Streams. Amazon Kinesis Data Streams is a service that enables you to capture, process, and analyze data streams in real time, such as clickstream data, application logs, or IoT telemetry. It does not support accessing and integrating data from AWS CodeCommit repositories, which are meant for storing and managing code, not data .

D. Use Amazon Kinesis Data Streams to access and integrate third-party datasets from Amazon Elastic Container Registry (Amazon ECR). This option is also not feasible, as Amazon ECR is a fully managed container registry service that stores, manages, and deploys container images, not a data source that can be accessed by Amazon Kinesis Data Streams. Amazon Kinesis Data Streams does not support accessing and integrating data from Amazon ECR, which is meant for storing and managing container images, not data .

The issue described is that theAWS Glue jobis reprocessing files from previous runs despite the bookmark feature being enabled. Bookmarks in AWS Glue allow jobs to keep track of which files or data have already been processed to avoid reprocessing. The most likely reason for reprocessing the files is missingS3 permissions, specificallys3

s3

is a permission required by AWS Glue when bookmarks are enabled to ensure Glue can retrieve metadata from the files in S3, which is necessary for the bookmark mechanism to function correctly. Without this permission, Glue cannot track which files have been processed, resulting in reprocessing during subsequent runs.

Concurrency settings (Option B)andthe version of AWS Glue (Option C)do not affect the bookmark behavior. Similarly, the lack of acommit statement (Option D)is not applicable in this context, as Glue handles commits internally when interacting with Redshift and S3.

Thus, the root cause is likely related to insufficient permissions on the S3 bucket, specificallys3

, which is required for bookmarks to work as expected.

For secure migration of data from an on-premises data center to AWS without using the public internet,AWS Direct Connectis the most secure and reliable method. UsingSecrets Managerto store service account credentials ensures that the credentials are managed securely with automatic rotation.

AWS Direct Connect:

Direct Connect establishes adedicated, private connectionbetween the on-premises data center and AWS, avoiding the public internet. This is ideal for secure, high-speed data transfers.

Amazon Athena is a serverless interactive query service that allows you to analyze data in Amazon S3 using standard SQL. Athena supports various data formats, such as CSV, JSON, ORC, Avro, and Parquet. However, not all data formats are equally efficient for querying. Some data formats, such as CSV and JSON, are row-oriented, meaning that they store data as a sequence of records, each with the same fields. Row-oriented formats are suitable for loading and exporting data, but they are not optimal for analytical queries that often access only a subset of columns. Row-oriented formats also do not support compression or encoding techniques that can reduce the data size and improve the query performance.

On the other hand, some data formats, such as ORC and Parquet, are column-oriented, meaning that they store data as a collection of columns, each with a specific data type. Column-oriented formats are ideal for analytical queries that often filter, aggregate, or join data by columns. Column-oriented formats also support compression and encoding techniques that can reduce the data size and improve the query performance. For example, Parquet supports dictionary encoding, which replaces repeated values with numeric codes, and run-length encoding, which replaces consecutive identical values with a single value and a count. Parquet also supports various compression algorithms, such as Snappy, GZIP, and ZSTD, that can further reduce the data size and improve the query performance.

Therefore, creating an AWS Glue extract, transform, and load (ETL) job to read from the .csv structured data source and writing the data into the data lake in Apache Parquet format will meet the requirements most cost-effectively. AWS Glue is a fully managed service that provides a serverless data integration platform for data preparation, data cataloging, and data loading. AWS Glue ETL jobs allow you to transform and load data from various sources into various targets, using either a graphical interface (AWS Glue Studio) or a code-based interface (AWS Glue console or AWS Glue API). By using AWS Glue ETL jobs, you can easily convert the data from CSV to Parquet format, without having to write or manage any code. Parquet is a column-oriented format that allows Athena to scan only the relevant columns and skip the rest, reducing the amount of data read from S3. This solution will also reduce the cost of Athena queries, as Athena charges based on the amount of data scanned from S3.

The other options are not as cost-effective as creating an AWS Glue ETL job to write the data into the data lake in Parquet format. Using an AWS Glue PySpark job to ingest the source data into the data lake in .csv format will not improve the query performance or reduce the query cost, as .csv is a row-oriented format that does not support columnar access or compression. Creating an AWS Glue ETL job to ingest the data into the data lake in JSON format will not improve the query performance or reduce the query cost, as JSON is also a row-oriented format that does not support columnar access orcompression. Using an AWS Glue PySpark job to ingest the source data into the data lake in Apache Avro format will improve the query performance, as Avro is a column-oriented format that supports compression and encoding, but it will require more operational effort, as you will need to write and maintain PySpark code to convert the data from CSV to Avro format. References:

Amazon Athena

Choosing the Right Data Format

AWS Glue

[AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide], Chapter 5: Data Analysis and Visualization, Section 5.1: Amazon Athena

The most efficient and low-operational-overhead solution for ingesting data into Amazon Redshift from Amazon Kinesis Data Streams is to useAmazon Redshift streaming ingestion. This feature allows Redshift to directly ingest streaming data from Kinesis Data Streams and process it in real-time.

Amazon Redshift Streaming Ingestion:

Redshift supports native streaming ingestion from Kinesis Data Streams, allowing real-time data to be queried usingmaterialized views.

This solution reduces operational complexity because you don't need intermediary services like Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose or S3 for batch loading.

Option A is the correct answer because it meets the requirements with the least operational overhead. Creating an S3 event notification that has an event type of s3:ObjectCreated:* will trigger the Lambda function whenever a new object is created in the S3 bucket. Using a filter rule to generate notifications only when the suffix includes .csv will ensure that the Lambda function only runs for .csv files. Setting the ARN of the Lambda function as the destination for the event notification will directly invoke the Lambda function without any additional steps.

Option B is incorrect because it requires the user to tag the objects with .csv, which adds an extra step and increases the operational overhead.

Option C is incorrect because it uses an event type of s3:*, which will trigger the Lambda function for any S3 event, not just object creation. This could result in unnecessary invocations and increased costs.

Option D is incorrect because it involves creating and subscribing to an SNS topic, which adds an extra layer of complexity and operational overhead.

 Changing the distribution key to the table column that has the largest dimension will help to balance the load more evenly across all five compute nodes. The distribution key determines how the rows of a table are distributed among the slices of the cluster. If the distribution key is not chosen wisely, it can cause data skew, meaning some slices will have more data than others, resulting in uneven CPU load and query performance. By choosing the table column that has the largest dimension, meaning the column that has the most distinct values, as the distribution key, the data engineer can ensure that the rows are distributed more uniformly across the slices, reducing data skew and improving query performance.

The other options are not solutions that will meet the requirements. Option A, changing the sort key to be the data column that is most often used in a WHERE clause of the SQL SELECT statement, will not affect the data distribution or the CPU load. The sort key determines the order in which the rows of a table are stored on disk, which can improve the performance of range-restricted queries, but not the load balancing. Option C, upgrading the reserved node from ra3.4xlarge to ra3.16xlarge, will not maintain the current number of compute nodes, as it will increase the cost and the capacity of the cluster. Option D, changing the primary key to be the data column that is most often used in a WHERE clause of the SQL SELECT statement, will not affect the datadistribution or the CPU load either. The primary key is a constraint that enforces the uniqueness of the rows in a table, but it does not influence the data layout or the query optimization. References:

Choosing a data distribution style

Choosing a data sort key

Working with primary keys

The best solution to meet the requirements of creating a data catalog that includes the IoT data, and allowing the analytics department to index the data, most cost-effectively, is to create an Amazon Athena workgroup, explore the data that is in Amazon S3 by using Apache Spark through Athena, and provide the Athena workgroup schema and tables to the analytics department.

Amazon Athena is a serverless, interactive query service that makes it easy to analyze data directly in Amazon S3 using standard SQL or Python1. Amazon Athena also supports Apache Spark, an open-source distributed processing framework that can run large-scale data analytics applications across clusters of servers2. You can use Athena to run Spark code on data in Amazon S3 without having to set up, manage, or scale anyinfrastructure. You can also use Athena to create and manage external tables that pointto your data in Amazon S3, and store them in an external data catalog, such as AWS Glue Data Catalog, Amazon Athena Data Catalog, or your own Apache Hive metastore3. You can create Athena workgroups to separate query execution and resource allocation based on different criteria, such as users, teams, or applications4. You can share the schemas and tables in your Athena workgroup with other users or applications, such as Amazon QuickSight, for data visualization and analysis5.

Using Athena and Spark to create a data catalog and explore the IoT data in Amazon S3 is the most cost-effective solution, as you pay only for the queries you run or the compute you use, and you pay nothing when the service is idle1. You also save on the operational overhead and complexity of managing data warehouse infrastructure, as Athena and Spark are serverless and scalable. You can also benefit from the flexibility and performance of Athena and Spark, as they support various data formats, including JSON, and can handle schema changes and complex queries efficiently.

Option A is not the best solution, as creating an AWS Glue Data Catalog, configuring an AWS Glue Schema Registry, creating a new AWS Glue workload to orchestrate the ingestion of the data that the analytics department will use into Amazon Redshift Serverless, would incur more costs and complexity than using Athena and Spark. AWS Glue Data Catalog is a persistent metadata store that contains table definitions, job definitions, and other control information to help you manage your AWS Glue components6. AWS Glue Schema Registry is a service that allows you to centrally store and manage the schemas of your streaming data in AWS Glue Data Catalog7. AWS Glue is a serverless data integration service that makes it easy to prepare, clean, enrich, and move data between data stores8. Amazon Redshift Serverless is a feature of Amazon Redshift, a fully managed data warehouse service, that allows you to run and scale analytics without having to manage data warehouse infrastructure9. While these services are powerful and useful for many data engineering scenarios, they are not necessary or cost-effective for creating a data catalog and indexing the IoT data in Amazon S3. AWS Glue Data Catalog and Schema Registry charge you based on the number of objects stored and the number of requests made67. AWS Glue charges you based on the compute time and the data processed by your ETL jobs8. Amazon Redshift Serverless charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries and the compute time used by your workloads9. These costs can add up quickly, especially if you have large volumes of IoT data and frequent schema changes. Moreover, using AWS Glue and Amazon Redshift Serverless would introduce additional latency and complexity, as you would have to ingest the data from Amazon S3 to Amazon Redshift Serverless, and then query it from there, instead of querying it directly from Amazon S3 using Athena and Spark.

Option B is not the best solution, as creating an Amazon Redshift provisioned cluster, creating an Amazon Redshift Spectrum database for the analytics department to explorethe data that is in Amazon S3, and creating Redshift stored procedures to load the data into Amazon Redshift, would incur more costs and complexity than using Athena and Spark. Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters are clusters that you create and manage by specifying the number and type of nodes, and the amount of storage and compute capacity10. Amazon Redshift Spectrum is a feature of Amazon Redshift that allows you to query and join data across your data warehouse and your data lake using standard SQL11. Redshift stored procedures are SQL statements that you can define and store in Amazon Redshift, and then call them by using the CALL command12. While these features are powerful and useful for many data warehousing scenarios, they are not necessary or cost-effective for creating a data catalog and indexing the IoT data in Amazon S3. Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters charge you based on the node type, the number of nodes, and the duration of the cluster10. Amazon Redshift Spectrum charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries11. These costs can add up quickly, especially if you have large volumes of IoT data and frequent schema changes. Moreover, using Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters and Spectrum would introduce additional latency and complexity, as you would have to provision and manage the cluster, create an external schema and database for the data in Amazon S3, and load the data into the cluster using stored procedures, instead of querying it directly from Amazon S3 using Athena and Spark.

Option D is not the best solution, as creating an AWS Glue Data Catalog, configuring an AWS Glue Schema Registry, creating AWS Lambda user defined functions (UDFs) by using the Amazon Redshift Data API, and creating an AWS Step Functions job to orchestrate the ingestion of the data that the analytics department will use into Amazon Redshift Serverless, would incur more costs and complexity than using Athena and Spark. AWS Lambda is a serverless compute service that lets you run code without provisioning or managing servers13. AWS Lambda UDFs are Lambda functions that you can invoke from within an Amazon Redshift query. Amazon Redshift Data API is a service that allows you to run SQL statements on Amazon Redshift clusters using HTTP requests, without needing a persistent connection. AWS Step Functions is a service that lets you coordinate multiple AWS services into serverless workflows. While these services are powerful and useful for many data engineering scenarios, they are not necessary or cost-effective for creating a data catalog and indexing the IoT data in Amazon S3. AWS Glue Data Catalog and Schema Registry charge you based on thenumber of objects stored and the number of requests made67. AWS Lambda charges you based on the number of requests and the duration of your functions13. Amazon Redshift Serverless charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries and the compute time used by your workloads9. AWS Step Functions charges you based on the number of state transitions in your workflows. These costs can add up quickly, especially if you have large volumes of IoT data and frequent schema changes. Moreover, using AWS Glue, AWS Lambda, Amazon Redshift Data API, and AWS Step Functions would introduce additionallatency and complexity, as you would have to create and invoke Lambda functions to ingest the data from Amazon S3 to Amazon Redshift Serverless using the Data API, and coordinate the ingestion process using Step Functions, instead of querying it directly from Amazon S3 using Athena and Spark. References:

What is Amazon Athena?

Apache Spark on Amazon Athena

Creating tables, updating the schema, and adding new partitions in the Data Catalog from AWS Glue ETL jobs

Managing Athena workgroups

Using Amazon QuickSight to visualize data in Amazon Athena

AWS Glue Data Catalog

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?

[Creating and using AWS Lambda UDFs]

[Using the Amazon Redshift Data API]

[What is AWS Step Functions?]

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide

Step 1: Log Collection (FluentBit and CloudWatch)

Option Asuggests using FluentBit to collect logs and OpenTelemetry to collect traces.

FluentBitis a lightweight log processor that integrates withAmazon EKSto collect and forward logs from Kubernetes clusters. It is widely used with minimal overhead, making it an ideal choice for log collection in this scenario. FluentBit is also natively compatible with AWS services.

OpenTelemetryis a popular framework to collect traces from distributed applications. It provides observability, making it easier to monitor microservices.

This combination allows you to effectively gather both logs and traces with minimal setup and configuration, aligning with the goal of least development effort.

CloudWatchcan be used to monitor logs (Option B and C). However, for applications that need more custom and fine-grained control over logging mechanisms, FluentBit and OpenTelemetry are the preferred choice in microservice environments.

Step 2: Log and Trace Correlation (Amazon OpenSearch)

Option D(Amazon OpenSearch) is specifically designed to search, analyze, and visualize logs, metrics, and traces in real-time. OpenSearch allows you tocorrelate logs and traceseffectively.

WithAmazon OpenSearch, you can set up dashboards that help in visualizing both logs and traces together, which assists in identifying any failure points across the entire request flow.

It offers integrations withFluentBitandOpenTelemetry, ensuring that both logs from the EKS cluster and application traces are centrally collected, stored, and correlated without additional heavy development.

Step 3: Why Other Options Are Not Suitable

Option B (Amazon Kinesis)is designed for real-time data streaming and analytics but is not as well-suited for tracing microservice requests and logs correlation compared to OpenSearch.

Option C (Amazon MSK)provides a managed Kafka streaming service, but this adds complexity when trying to integrate and correlate logs and traces from a microservice environment. Setting up Kafka requires more development effort compared to using FluentBit and OpenTelemetry.

Option E (AWS Glue)is primarily an ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) service. While Glue is powerful for data processing, it is not a native tool for log and trace correlation, and using it would add unnecessary complexity for this use case.

Conclusion:

To meet the requirements with the least development effort:

UseFluentBitfor log collection andOpenTelemetryfor tracing (Option A).

Correlate logs and traces usingAmazon OpenSearch(Option D).

This approach leverages AWS-native services designed for seamless integration with microservices hosted on Amazon EKS and ensures effective monitoring with minimal overhead.