Amazon DVA-C02 Exam - Topic 1 Question 47 Discussion

Actual exam question for Amazon's DVA-C02 exam

Question #: 47
Topic #: 1

A company created an application to consume and process dat

a. The application uses Amazon SQS and AWS Lambda functions. The application is currently working as expected, but it occasionally receives several messages that it cannot process properly. The company needs to clear these messages to prevent the queue from becoming blocked. A developer must implement a solution that makes queue processing always operational. The solution must give the company the ability to defer the messages with errors and save these messages for further analysis. What is the MOST operationally efficient solution that meets these requirements?

AConfigure Amazon CloudWatch Logs to save the error messages to a separate log stream.

BCreate a new SQS queue. Set the new queue as a dead-letter queue for the application queue. Configure the Maximum Receives setting.

CChange the SQS queue to a FIFO queue. Configure the message retention period to 0 seconds.

DConfigure an Amazon CloudWatch alarm for Lambda function errors. Publish messages to an Amazon SNS topic to notify administrator users.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

Using a dead-letter queue (DLQ) with Amazon SQS is the most operationally efficient solution for handling unprocessable messages.

Amazon SQS Dead-Letter Queue:

A DLQ is used to capture messages that fail processing after a specified number of attempts.

Allows the application to continue processing other messages without being blocked.

Messages in the DLQ can be analyzed later for debugging and resolution.

Why DLQ is the Best Option:

Operational Efficiency: Automatically defers messages with errors, ensuring the queue is not blocked.

Analysis Ready: Messages in the DLQ can be inspected to identify recurring issues.

Scalable: Works seamlessly with Lambda and SQS at scale.

Why Not Other Options:

Option A: Logs the messages but does not resolve the queue blockage issue.

Option C: FIFO queues and 0-second retention do not provide error handling or analysis capabilities.

Option D: Alerts administrators but does not handle or store the unprocessable messages.

Steps to Implement:

Create a new SQS queue to serve as the DLQ.

Attach the DLQ to the primary queue and configure the Maximum Receives setting.

Using Amazon SQS Dead-Letter Queues

Best Practices for Using Amazon SQS with AWS Lambda

by Gail at Mar 05, 2025, 01:41 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium DVA-C02 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Kenny

5 months ago

Not sure if just creating a new queue is enough. What if the errors keep happening?

upvoted 0 times

...

Giuseppe

5 months ago

B is the way to go! It keeps things organized for later analysis.

upvoted 0 times

...

Oren

5 months ago

Surprised that FIFO queues are even mentioned here. They don't help with errors!

upvoted 0 times

...

Melissa

5 months ago

I think A could work too, but it doesn't really solve the problem.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lemuel

6 months ago

Option B is definitely the best choice here. Dead-letter queues are super useful!

upvoted 0 times

...

Roselle

6 months ago

I thought about using CloudWatch for monitoring errors, but I don't think just logging them would help with processing. I feel like we need a more proactive approach.

upvoted 0 times

...

In

6 months ago

I practiced a similar question where we had to handle message failures. I think using a dead-letter queue was the answer there too, so B might be the way to go.

upvoted 0 times

...

Winifred

6 months ago

I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like changing the queue to FIFO isn't the best solution here. It seems more about order than error handling.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kristeen

6 months ago

I remember studying about dead-letter queues in SQS. I think option B sounds right because it allows for deferring messages that can't be processed.

upvoted 0 times

...

Valentine

6 months ago

This seems straightforward enough. I'm pretty confident that option B is the best solution here, as it allows us to create a dead-letter queue to handle the problematic messages.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lili

6 months ago

Okay, I think I've got a good handle on this. The key is finding a way to defer the messages with errors and save them for further analysis, while keeping the queue processing operational. I'm leaning towards option B.

upvoted 0 times

...

Elfriede

6 months ago

Hmm, I'm a bit confused by the question. I'll need to read through it a few times to make sure I understand all the details before attempting to answer.

upvoted 0 times

...

Merlyn

7 months ago

This looks like a tricky one. I'll need to carefully consider the requirements and the different options to find the most operationally efficient solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

Cassie

1 year ago

Hold up, did someone say FIFO queue? I'm not touching that with a 10-foot pole! That's just asking for trouble.

upvoted 0 times

Karrie

1 year ago

Yeah, using CloudWatch Logs to save error messages separately sounds like a good solution too.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lorriane

1 year ago

I think setting up a dead-letter queue with Maximum Receives configured might be a better option.

upvoted 0 times

...

Peggie

1 year ago

I agree, FIFO queues can be tricky to work with.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kenny

1 year ago

I see your point, Melinda. But I think option A is also a good choice as it saves error messages to a separate log stream for easy access.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shaunna

1 year ago

Option D could work, but setting up the CloudWatch alarm and SNS notifications might be overkill for this particular scenario. B is the simplest and most effective solution.

upvoted 0 times

Helga

1 year ago

Let's go with option B then, it's the simplest and most effective solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

Abraham

1 year ago

I agree, setting up a dead-letter queue seems like the most efficient solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

Terrilyn

1 year ago

I think option B is the best choice here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ty

1 year ago

Hmm, I'm not sure about option C. Reducing the message retention period to 0 seconds doesn't sound like a good idea. We need to hold onto those failed messages for further analysis.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ettie

1 year ago

I agree with Annelle. Sending the failed messages to a dead-letter queue gives us the ability to review and retry them later. Seems like the most efficient solution.

upvoted 0 times