Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Google Professional Cloud Database Engineer Exam - Topic 5 Question 60 Discussion

Actual exam question for Google's Professional Cloud Database Engineer exam
Question #: 60
Topic #: 5
[All Professional Cloud Database Engineer Questions]

Your organization is running a low-latency reporting application on Microsoft SQL Server. In addition to the database engine, you are using SQL Server Analysis Services (SSAS), SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS), and SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) in your on-premises environment. You want to migrate your Microsoft SQL Server database instances to Google Cloud. You need to ensure minimal disruption to the existing architecture during migration. What should you do?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Moon
4 days ago
I practiced a similar question, and I think Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL wouldn't be compatible with SQL Server features, so that seems wrong.
upvoted 0 times
...
Christiane
10 days ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think migrating to Compute Engine could give us more control over the environment, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Audra
15 days ago
I remember that Cloud SQL for SQL Server is designed specifically for SQL Server workloads, so it might be the best choice for minimal disruption.
upvoted 0 times
...
Glory
21 days ago
This is a tricky one. We need to consider not just the database, but the entire ecosystem of services we're using. I'm not sure if Cloud SQL for SQL Server would fully accommodate SSAS, SSRS, and SSIS. Option D, Migrate to GKE, might give us more flexibility to lift and shift the whole environment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leana
26 days ago
I think the key here is to minimize disruption to the existing architecture. That makes me lean towards option A - Migrate to Cloud SQL for SQL Server. It should provide a relatively seamless transition since it's the closest match to our current setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alease
1 month ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused here. We're using a lot of Microsoft SQL Server components like SSAS, SSRS, and SSIS. I'm not sure if migrating to Cloud SQL for SQL Server would fully support all of those services. Maybe option D, Migrate to GKE, could be a better fit to maintain the full Microsoft stack.
upvoted 0 times
...
Salina
1 month ago
This seems like a straightforward migration question. I'd go with option A - Migrate to Cloud SQL for SQL Server since that would allow us to keep the existing SQL Server architecture and minimize disruption.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ahmed
2 months ago
But what about migrating to Compute Engine? Wouldn't that be a better option?
upvoted 0 times
...
Luis
2 months ago
I'm not sure about D. Kubernetes seems like overkill for a simple database migration. Unless you really need the advanced container orchestration features.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ben
3 months ago
I agree with Candida, it will ensure minimal disruption to the existing architecture.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gladys
3 months ago
Hmm, I don't know. Wouldn't Compute Engine give us more flexibility to customize the infrastructure? Although the migration might be a bit more complex.
upvoted 0 times
Eleni
2 months ago
A) Migrate to Cloud SQL for SQL Server.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Candida
3 months ago
I think we should migrate to Cloud SQL for SQL Server.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rolf
3 months ago
A is the way to go. Cloud SQL for SQL Server is the most straightforward option, and it keeps the same database engine we're already using.
upvoted 0 times
Wade
2 months ago
Agreed. It's important to minimize any potential issues during the migration.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delila
2 months ago
That makes sense. It will be the least disruptive option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julie
3 months ago
A) Migrate to Cloud SQL for SQL Server.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel