Q: 5
A company deploys an application via containers in its local data center. As soon as the application
goes into production, it starts to crash at specific hours of the day. After investigation, it is concluded
that the crashes are due to too many users accessing the application simultaneously. The spikes must
be addressed and allow for future growth without discarding the investment already made. Which
deployment model must be used?
Options
Discussion
Option A
I’d say it'd be D. Public cloud handles those spikes best and is built for fast scaling.
Not D, it's A. The key is the requirement to keep their existing investment, which means they want to use both local and cloud resources. Hybrid cloud covers on-prem plus scalable public resources for those traffic spikes. Easy trap with D since public alone would make them ditch the data center.
D could work since public cloud is super scalable and avoids local infra limits, especially with container deployment. But the question mentions keeping current investments, so maybe I'm missing something? Still think D is a valid choice here.
Pretty sure D, public cloud looks right since it can scale way up for spikes and you don't have to manage extra infra. If the app's containerized already, migration isn't that big a deal. I think this works, unless there's a strict requirement to keep everything local only. Agree?
A imo. Hybrid cloud fits because you can keep your local resources but offload to the public cloud during spikes. That way, you don’t have to get rid of what you already have. Not 100% but that’s how I read it.
Its A, hybrid cloud lets you keep your on-premises setup but scale out to public cloud during heavy traffic. Saw similar topics in the official guide and practice labs. Makes sense for bursts like the question describes, pretty sure about this.
Be respectful. No spam.
