Which of the following alternatives will lower costs without compromising average performance of the system or data integrity for the raw data?

Your department creates regular analytics reports from your company’s log files All log data is collected in Amazon S3 and processed by daily Amazon Elastic MapReduce (EMR) jobs that generate daily PDF reports and aggregated tables in CSV format for an Amazon Redshift data warehouse. Your CFO requests that you optimize the cost structure for this system.

Which of the following alternatives will lower costs without compromising average performance of the system or data integrity for the raw data?
A . Use reduced redundancy storage (RRS) for all data In S3. Use a combination of Spot Instances and Reserved Instances for Amazon EMR jobs. Use Reserved Instances for Amazon Redshift.
B . Use reduced redundancy storage (RRS) for PDF and .csv data in S3. Add Spot Instances to EMR jobs. Use Spot Instances for Amazon Redshift.
C . Use reduced redundancy storage (RRS) for PDF and .csv data In Amazon S3. Add Spot Instances to Amazon EMR jobs. Use Reserved Instances for Amazon Redshift.
D . Use reduced redundancy storage (RRS) for all data in Amazon S3. Add Spot Instances to Amazon EMR jobs. Use Reserved Instances for Amazon Redshift.

View Answer

Answer: C

Explanation:

Using Reduced Redundancy Storage Amazon S3 stores objects according to their storage class. It assigns the storage class to an object when it is written to Amazon S3. You can assign objects a specific storage class (standard or reduced redundancy) only when you write the objects to an Amazon S3 bucket or when you copy objects that are already stored in Amazon S3. Standard is the default storage class. For information about storage classes, see Object Key and Metadata.

In order to reduce storage costs, you can use reduced redundancy storage for noncritical, reproducible data at lower levels of redundancy than Amazon S3 provides with standard storage. The lower level of redundancy results in less durability and availability, but in many cases, the lower costs can make reduced redundancy storage an acceptable storage solution. For example, it can be a cost-effective solution for sharing media content that is durably stored elsewhere. It can also make sense if you are storing thumbnails and other resized images that can be easily reproduced from an original image.

Reduced redundancy storage is designed to provide 99.99% durability of objects over a given year. This durability level corresponds to an average annual expected loss of 0.01% of objects. For example, if you store 10,000 objects using the RRS option, you can, on average, expect to incur an annual loss of a single object per year (0.01% of 10,000 objects).

Note:

This annual loss represents an expected average and does not guarantee the loss of less than 0.01% of objects in a given year.

Reduced redundancy storage stores objects on multiple devices across multiple facilities, providing 400 times the durability of a typical disk drive, but it does not replicate objects as many times as Amazon S3 standard storage. In addition, reduced redundancy storage is designed to sustain the loss of data in a single facility.

If an object in reduced redundancy storage has been lost, Amazon S3 will return a 405 error on requests made to that object. Amazon S3 also offers notifications for reduced redundancy storage object loss: you can configure your bucket so that when Amazon S3 detects the loss of an RRS object, a notification will be sent through Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS). You can then replace the lost object. To enable notifications, you can use the Amazon S3 console to set the Notifications property of your bucket.