Q: 2
A solutions architect has launched multiple Amazon EC2 instances in a placement group within a
single Availability Zone. Because of additional load on the system, the solutions architect attempts to
add new instances to the placement group. However, the solutions architect receives an insufficient
capacity error.
What should the solutions architect do to troubleshoot this issue?
Options
Discussion
Option B
Don’t think C makes sense-placement groups can’t be merged. B is what you’d actually do for insufficient capacity, that’s from AWS docs and seen in practice exams. D is a trap here. Agree?
B , that's the standard approach AWS recommends for cluster placement group capacity errors. Stopping and starting can shuffle the group onto hardware with enough room for your extra instances. Not sure if there'd be downtime issues but the question doesn't mention a no-downtime policy. Let me know if you think otherwise.
B , stopping and starting all instances in the placement group is the way AWS recommends for cluster placement group capacity errors. A is tempting but spread groups don't solve underlying hardware limits. Disagree?
C or B. Spread groups aren't the same as cluster, so A doesn't fit and merging placement groups isn't a thing (C feels off). Pretty sure AWS docs say stop/start all instances (B) can fix capacity issues, but it's downtime. Could be missing a detail here.
Nah, I don’t think it’s D. B is the right troubleshooting step since stopping and starting lets AWS move the group to hardware with enough capacity. Option A is a trick-spread placement groups work differently. Anyone see this behave otherwise?
I don't think D is right here. B makes sense since stopping and starting all the instances lets AWS try to place everything together again, which can fix the capacity issue. D is tempting but doesn't address the placement group problem directly.
Option B is what I've seen on similar practice sets. Stopping and starting all the placement group instances lets AWS try to reallocate the underlying hosts, clearing up capacity limitations. Not fully sure if there's an edge case, but B fits best imo.
Nah, I don’t think it’s D. B is what AWS suggests for this placement group capacity problem-stop and start to try different hardware. D is more about dedicated tenancy, which doesn’t solve the core issue here.
Probably B, AWS always gives that stop/start trick for cluster placement group capacity issues in the exam pools.
Be respectful. No spam.
