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

Snowflake ADA-C01 Exam - Topic 1 Question 15 Discussion

Actual exam question for Snowflake's ADA-C01 exam
Question #: 15
Topic #: 1
[All ADA-C01 Questions]

A Snowflake customer is experiencing higher costs than anticipated while migrating their data warehouse workloads from on-premises to Snowflake. The migration

workloads have been deployed on a single warehouse and are characterized by a large number of small INSERTs rather than bulk loading of large extracts. That single

warehouse has been configured as a single cluster, 2XL because there are many parallel INSERTs that are scheduled during nightly loads.

How can the Administrator reduce the costs, while minimizing the overall load times, for migrating data warehouse history?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

The SIMULATED_DATA_SHARING_CONSUMER session parameter allows a data provider to test the integrity of secure views based on the account that is accessing that view2. By setting this parameter to the name of the consumer account, the data provider can query the secure view and see the results that a user in the consumer account will see2. This helps to ensure that sensitive data in a shared database is not exposed to unauthorized users1. The other options are not valid session parameters in Snowflake3


by Pete at Jun 03, 2024, 01:50 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ADA-C01 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Latosha
3 months ago
Not sure about converting to several tables, that could complicate things.
upvoted 0 times
...
Amber
3 months ago
Keeping it SMALL or XSMALL sounds like a smart move for cost savings.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elina
3 months ago
Surprised they didn't consider splitting the INSERTs into smaller batches!
upvoted 0 times
...
Sheldon
4 months ago
I think going to 4XL is just going to blow the budget.
upvoted 0 times
...
Florinda
4 months ago
A multi-cluster setup could really help with those parallel loads.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aretha
4 months ago
I vaguely recall something about reducing contention by splitting INSERTs across multiple tables, which might relate to option D, but I’m not sure how that affects overall load times.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elliot
4 months ago
I’m leaning towards option C because it seems like a good way to balance cost and performance, but I’m not completely confident about the multi-cluster setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosendo
4 months ago
I think option B sounds tempting, but increasing to a 4XL might just drive costs up even more. I feel like we practiced a similar scenario where smaller warehouses were more efficient.
upvoted 0 times
...
Johnna
5 months ago
I remember we discussed how using a multi-cluster warehouse could help with parallel processing, but I'm not sure if keeping it small is the best approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindsay
5 months ago
This is a good test of our understanding of Snowflake optimization. I'll need to weigh the pros and cons of each choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Magdalene
5 months ago
I'm pretty confident I know the right approach here. I'd go with option C to use a multi-cluster warehouse.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gracia
5 months ago
Okay, I think I have a strategy. I'll focus on minimizing costs while also trying to maintain reasonable load times.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elke
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused by the details here. I'll need to re-read the question and think through the different options.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashawn
5 months ago
This seems like a tricky one. I'll need to carefully consider the trade-offs between cost and performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tegan
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. The wording is a bit vague, and I want to make sure I fully understand the concepts before answering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Salena
5 months ago
I'm a bit unsure, but I remember something about malicious scans being linked to the delivery stage? That might not be right though.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jovita
5 months ago
I'm a little confused by this question. On one hand, I don't want to ignore Ethel's question completely. But if it's completely irrelevant, I'm not sure it's the best use of class time. I'm leaning towards option C - politely explain that we need to stick to the subject matter.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alverta
5 months ago
I'm a little confused by this question. The options don't seem to clearly match up with what I know about monetary unit sampling. I'll have to think it through carefully before answering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cassi
5 months ago
I've seen Null Scans before, so I'm pretty confident that option A, "TCRflags==0x000", is the correct filter to use here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Colby
5 months ago
I practiced a similar question where IP address and domain were mentioned. I feel like those are the two attributes we need.
upvoted 0 times
...
Corazon
10 months ago
I'm going with B. Upgrading to a 4XL is like putting a turbocharger on a lawnmower - total overkill, but hey, it'll get the job done!
upvoted 0 times
...
Lorriane
10 months ago
Option C is the winner! Multi-clustering a small warehouse is like using a quantum computer to mine Bitcoin - overkill, but oh so satisfying.
upvoted 0 times
Galen
8 months ago
Agreed! Finding that balance is key when migrating data warehouse workloads.
upvoted 0 times
...
Michael
8 months ago
Definitely! It's all about optimizing performance while keeping costs in check.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kati
9 months ago
Option C is the winner! Multi-clustering a small warehouse is like using a quantum computer to mine Bitcoin - overkill, but oh so satisfying.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Norah
10 months ago
A is the way to go. Adding another 2XL warehouse will double the available resources to process all those parallel loads.
upvoted 0 times
Precious
9 months ago
I agree. It's a practical solution to optimize the migration process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kami
9 months ago
That makes sense. It should help reduce costs while still handling the workload efficiently.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elenore
9 months ago
A is the way to go. Adding another 2XL warehouse will double the available resources to process all those parallel loads.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Johnson
10 months ago
D seems like the best option to me. Splitting those large tables into smaller ones will reduce contention and improve performance.
upvoted 0 times
Iesha
8 months ago
True, but keeping the warehouse as SMALL or XSMALL and configuring it as a multi-cluster could also help with handling parallel queries.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maryann
8 months ago
That could work too, but changing the 2XL warehouse to 4XL might also be a good option to increase parallel processing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pamella
9 months ago
But wouldn't it be better to add another 2XL warehouse to handle some of the load?
upvoted 0 times
...
Mose
9 months ago
Splitting the tables with D sounds like the best way to optimize performance and reduce costs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Loreta
9 months ago
I agree, D seems like the most practical solution to reduce contention.
upvoted 0 times
...
Corinne
9 months ago
I think D is a good idea. Splitting the tables will definitely help with performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delmy
9 months ago
I think D is a good idea. Splitting the tables will definitely help with performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Yolando
10 months ago
I think B is the right answer. Upgrading to a 4XL warehouse will give you more parallel processing power to handle those small INSERTs.
upvoted 0 times
Johnna
10 months ago
But wouldn't it be better to have multiple clusters with a SMALL or XSMALL warehouse instead?
upvoted 0 times
...
Naomi
10 months ago
I agree, upgrading to a 4XL warehouse should help with the parallel processing.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Adell
11 months ago
I see both points. But I think option A could also work. Deploying another 2XL warehouse to handle a portion of the load queries can help distribute the workload and reduce costs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margart
11 months ago
The correct answer is C. Using a multi-cluster SMALL or XSMALL warehouse will likely provide better concurrency and cost savings than a single large warehouse.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alisha
11 months ago
I disagree with Elden. I believe option C is the way to go. Configuring the warehouse as a multi-cluster warehouse can handle parallel load queries more efficiently.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elden
11 months ago
I think option B is the best choice. Increasing the number of threads available for parallel load queries can help reduce costs and minimize load times.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel