MENU
A developer is creating an AWS Lambda function. The Lambda function needs an external library to connect to a third-party solution The external library is a collection of files with a total size of 100 MB The developer needs to make the external library available to the Lambda execution environment and reduce the Lambda package space
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Suggested Answer: A
Get Premium DVA-C02 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
Lambda Layers:These are designed to package dependencies that you can share across functions.
How to Use:
Create a layer, upload your 100MB library as a zip.
Attach the layer to your function.
In your function code, import the library from the standard layer path.
Lambda Layers:https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/configuration-layers.html
33 comments · newest first
YV
Yvonne
11 months ago
A is the best option for reducing package size with minimal hassle!
BA
Barrett
11 months ago
C seems like a hacky solution, not ideal for production.
RE
Regenia
11 months ago
Wait, can you really use EFS with Lambda? That sounds complicated.
MI
Miles
11 months ago
I disagree, B could work too, especially for larger libraries.
LI
Lilli
12 months ago
A is definitely the way to go! Lambda layers are super convenient.
LA
Laila
12 months ago
EFS sounds like a good option for larger files, but I remember it can be more complex to set up. I wonder if the operational overhead is really the least with option D.
SH
Shawna
1 year ago
I vaguely recall that the /tmp directory has size limitations, so option C might not be ideal for a 100 MB library. It seems risky.
MU
Muriel
1 year ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think using S3 could add more complexity than necessary. I feel like we practiced a similar question where layers were the answer.
SU
Suzi
1 year ago
I remember discussing Lambda layers in class, and I think they are designed specifically for this kind of situation. So, option A seems like the best choice.
FR
Franchesca
1 year ago
I'm not sure about the performance implications of mounting an S3 bucket or EFS volume in the Lambda function. Option C with the /tmp directory might be the most efficient in terms of execution time.
WY
Wynell
1 year ago
I'm leaning towards Option D with the Amazon EFS volume. That way the library is stored in a separate, scalable storage system and can be easily accessed by the Lambda function.
BU
Bulah
1 year ago
Option A with the Lambda layer seems like the simplest and most straightforward solution. It keeps the library separate from the Lambda function code and should be easy to manage.
GE
Gearldine
1 year ago
This looks like a pretty straightforward AWS Lambda question. I think the key is to find the solution that minimizes operational overhead while still meeting the requirements.
MA
Madelyn
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the different options here. I'm not sure which one would have the least operational overhead. I'll need to think this through carefully.
EV
Evangelina
1 year ago
I think 3D privacy masking might refer to how the mask changes shape, like option B. I'm not entirely sure though.
LO
Loise
2 years ago
Can you imagine if the developer just tried to include the entire 100MB library directly in the Lambda function's code? Talk about a bloated package!
KI
Kina
2 years ago
C: It's important to optimize the package size to improve performance and reduce operational overhead.
JA
Jackie
2 years ago
B: That would definitely help reduce the Lambda package size and keep things organized.
OC
Ocie
2 years ago
A: A) Create a Lambda layer to store the external library Configure the Lambda function to use the layer
CA
Carmelina
2 years ago
I'm not sure, but I think option D could also work. Mounting an EFS volume in the Lambda function might be a good approach.
LO
Lorean
2 years ago
I agree with Staci. Using a Lambda layer seems like the most efficient way to handle the external library.
ST
Staci
2 years ago
I think option A is the best solution.
RE
Reena
2 years ago
Option D with EFS is an interesting choice, but it might be overkill for a 100MB library. Layers or S3 seem like more straightforward solutions to me.
CO
Cordelia
2 years ago
C: Yeah, I think using the /tmp directory during deployment is a bit messy. Layers or S3 would be cleaner solutions.
SA
Sarina
2 years ago
B: I agree, using S3 also seems like a good option for this scenario.
WE
Wei
2 years ago
A: I think option A with Lambda layers is the way to go. It's simple and efficient.
LI
Lindy
2 years ago
Option C looks tempting, but I'm worried about the potential performance impact of loading the library from the /tmp directory during deployment. Better to keep it separate in my opinion.
CO
Cordell
2 years ago
I'd go with Option B. Storing the library in S3 and mounting the folder in the Lambda function seems like a good way to keep things modular and maintainable.
NO
Noah
2 years ago
Option A seems like the easiest way to go. Layers are designed for this exact use case, and it should reduce the deployment package size.
DO
Dominga
2 years ago
D) Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) volume. Upload the external library to the EFS volume Mount the EFS volume in the Lambda function. Import the library by using the proper folder in the mount point.
TR
Trina
2 years ago
A sounds like the best option. It's straightforward and should help keep the Lambda package size down.
TY
Tyra
2 years ago
B) Create an Amazon S3 bucket Upload the external library into the S3 bucket. Mount the S3 bucket folder in the Lambda function Import the library by using the proper folder in the mount point.
ON
Ona
2 years ago
A) Create a Lambda layer to store the external library Configure the Lambda function to use the layer