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

Linux Foundation LFCA Exam - Topic 3 Question 18 Discussion

Actual exam question for Linux Foundation's LFCA exam
Question #: 18
Topic #: 3
[All LFCA Questions]

An IT associate has a web application running on multiple servers, configured to scale based on CPU usage. The current configuration has a minimum size of 1 and a maximum size of 5 servers, designed to launch and spread the instances across 3 Availability Zones (AZ). During a low utilization period, an entire AZ went down, and the application experienced downtime. What can the IT associate do to increase the availability of the application?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Karan
4 months ago
Increasing the max to 6 won't fix the AZ issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Florinda
4 months ago
Changing to scale based on requests could help with traffic spikes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mitsue
4 months ago
Surprised the AZs went down completely!
upvoted 0 times
...
Reta
4 months ago
I disagree, scaling by requests might be better.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brinda
5 months ago
Increasing the minimum to 2 seems smart.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carmen
5 months ago
Increasing the maximum to 6 seems like it could help, but I wonder if that really addresses the underlying issue. Not sure about option D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lorean
5 months ago
I practiced a similar question where reducing AZs actually led to more downtime. So, I don't think option C is the right move here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chantay
5 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think scaling based on requests might help with load balancing. Option B could be a good choice, but I need to think more about it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janessa
5 months ago
I remember we discussed how increasing the minimum servers could help maintain availability during an AZ failure. So, option A sounds reasonable.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ivory
5 months ago
This is a tricky one, but I think I have a good strategy. Decreasing the number of AZs could reduce the impact of an AZ failure, so I'll go with option C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bettye
5 months ago
I'm a little confused by this question. Scaling based on CPU usage seems like a good approach, but I'm not sure if changing the scaling metric is the right solution here. I'll need to re-read the question carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Basilia
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got this. The key is to spread the instances across more Availability Zones to reduce the impact of a single AZ going down. I'll go with option A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wilda
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. Increasing the minimum number of servers could help, but I'm not sure if that's the best approach. I'll need to think it through.
upvoted 0 times
...
Micaela
6 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question about increasing the availability of a web application. I'll need to carefully consider the options and think about the tradeoffs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stevie
6 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I'll need to review the OSPF Router ID details again.
upvoted 0 times
...
Darell
6 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question about resource management. Based on the details provided, the approach being described is likely used to identify resource capacity and capability, which is crucial for making the case for acquiring new resources.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lorenza
10 months ago
Wait, did the question say the AZ went down, or the IT associate? Either way, I hope they have a backup plan, like a cup of coffee and a good sense of humor.
upvoted 0 times
...
Claudia
10 months ago
Increasing the maximum to 6? That's overkill, unless we're planning to host the entire internet on this app.
upvoted 0 times
Cory
10 months ago
C) Decrease the AZs to 2
upvoted 0 times
...
Cory
10 months ago
A) Increase the minimum to 2
upvoted 0 times
...
Cory
10 months ago
B) Change to scale based on number of requests
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Elly
10 months ago
Decreasing the AZs to 2? That's risky, we might as well put all our eggs in one basket!
upvoted 0 times
Alonso
9 months ago
User 3: I agree, increasing the minimum would definitely help spread the load better.
upvoted 0 times
...
Veta
9 months ago
User 2: That sounds like a good idea, it would help with availability during low utilization periods.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashaunda
10 months ago
User 1: We should increase the minimum to 2 servers.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Wendell
11 months ago
Scaling based on number of requests? Interesting, but what if the requests are low and the CPU usage is still high?
upvoted 0 times
Helene
10 months ago
D) Increase the maximum to 6
upvoted 0 times
...
Felice
10 months ago
Increase the maximum to 6
upvoted 0 times
...
Helene
10 months ago
B) Change to scale based on number of requests
upvoted 0 times
...
Felice
10 months ago
Increase the minimum to 2
upvoted 0 times
...
Helene
11 months ago
A) Increase the minimum to 2
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Taryn
11 months ago
Hmm, increasing the minimum to 2 seems like a good start. At least we'll have a fallback if one AZ goes down.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ressie
11 months ago
I think increasing the maximum to 6 servers would provide better redundancy in case of AZ failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mari
11 months ago
I disagree, I believe changing to scale based on number of requests would be a better solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elena
12 months ago
I think increasing the minimum to 2 servers would help increase availability.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel