New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Google Professional Cloud Architect Exam - Topic 1 Question 11 Discussion

Actual exam question for Google's Professional Cloud Architect exam
Question #: 11
Topic #: 1
[All Professional Cloud Architect Questions]

You are developing your microservices application on Google Kubernetes Engine. During testing, you want to validate the behavior of your application in case a specific microservice should suddenly crash. What should you do?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

Microservice runs on all nodes. The Micro service runs on Pod, Pod runs on Nodes. Nodes is nothing but Virtual machines. Once deployed the application microservices will get deployed across all Nodes. Destroying one node may not mimic the behaviour of microservice crashing as it may be running in other nodes.

link: https://istio.io/latest/docs/tasks/traffic-management/fault-injection/


by Brandon at May 08, 2022, 01:18 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium Professional Cloud Architect Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Dawne
4 months ago
Wait, can you really just destroy a node like that?
upvoted 0 times
...
Jenelle
4 months ago
D sounds interesting, but can it really handle crashes?
upvoted 0 times
...
Laura
4 months ago
Totally agree with B, it's safer and more controlled.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nathan
4 months ago
I think C is a bit extreme, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Tayna
5 months ago
B is the best option for simulating faults.
upvoted 0 times
...
Phillip
5 months ago
I practiced a similar question where we had to manage traffic in Kubernetes, and I feel like option D could be relevant here too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janessa
5 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think adding a taint might not be the best approach for testing a crash scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Scarlet
5 months ago
I remember studying about Istio's fault injection, and it seems like a good way to simulate a crash without actually destroying anything.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viva
5 months ago
Destroying a node sounds extreme; I think there are safer methods to test microservice failures, like using Istio.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lourdes
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got this. Focusing on the interfaces between components, Equivalence Partitioning seems like the most likely technique to find different types of defects.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kathrine
5 months ago
I'm feeling pretty confident on this one. The suppliers are the ones who would have the deepest understanding of the technical capabilities and limitations of the potential solutions, so they'd be the best source of information on the technical constraints. That's my pick for this question.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ligia
5 months ago
If I recall correctly, the 1:1 mapping issue could be a problem for scaling in VNet peering. It might not be the best solution for larger architectures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dortha
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused by this question. I'll need to review the Jenkins documentation to make sure I understand the workspace locking behavior.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sanjuana
5 months ago
From what I recall, option D makes sense since it addresses whether we need new capabilities for the launch. It's crucial to ensure everything is in place, right?
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel