Snowflake Exam ADA-C01 Topic 1 Question 15 Discussion

Actual exam question for Snowflake's ADA-C01 exam

Question #: 15
Topic #: 1

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?

AThere should be another 2XL warehouse deployed to handle a portion of the load queries.

BThe 2XL warehouse should be changed to 4XL to increase the number of threads available for parallel load queries.

CThe warehouse should be kept as a SMALL or XSMALL and configured as a multi-cluster warehouse to handle the parallel load queries.

DThe INSERTS should be converted to several tables to avoid contention on large tables that slows down query processing.

Show Suggested 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:

Submit Cancel

Corazon

3 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

3 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

2 months ago

Agreed! Finding that balance is key when migrating data warehouse workloads.

upvoted 0 times

...

Michael

2 months ago

Definitely! It's all about optimizing performance while keeping costs in check.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kati

2 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

3 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

2 months ago

I agree. It's a practical solution to optimize the migration process.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kami

3 months ago

That makes sense. It should help reduce costs while still handling the workload efficiently.

upvoted 0 times

...

Elenore

3 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

4 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

2 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

2 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

2 months ago

But wouldn't it be better to add another 2XL warehouse to handle some of the load?

upvoted 0 times

...

Mose

2 months ago

Splitting the tables with D sounds like the best way to optimize performance and reduce costs.

upvoted 0 times

...

Loreta

3 months ago

I agree, D seems like the most practical solution to reduce contention.

upvoted 0 times

...

Corinne

3 months ago

I think D is a good idea. Splitting the tables will definitely help with performance.

upvoted 0 times

...

Delmy

3 months ago

I think D is a good idea. Splitting the tables will definitely help with performance.

upvoted 0 times

...

Yolando

4 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

3 months ago

But wouldn't it be better to have multiple clusters with a SMALL or XSMALL warehouse instead?

upvoted 0 times

...

Naomi

3 months ago

I agree, upgrading to a 4XL warehouse should help with the parallel processing.

upvoted 0 times

...

Adell

4 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

4 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

4 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

4 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

...