Examtopics

コメント(7)

• 正解だと思う選択肢: B

  Per ChatGPT Compute Savings Plans are not suitable for instances that run for only 3 hours a week without interruption. Compute Savings Plans provide discounts for consistent usage of EC2 instances in exchange for a commitment to a specific amount of compute usage (measured in dollars per hour) over a 1- or 3-year term. They are designed for workloads with predictable and sustained usage, not for sporadic or short-duration instances like those running only 3 hours per week. Therefore, Compute Savings Plans would not be the most cost-effective option for this scenario.

  👍 4

  DandyAndy2024/06/29
• 正解だと思う選択肢: B

  The most cost-effective instance purchasing option for this scenario is B. On-Demand Instances. Here’s why: On-Demand Instances are ideal for workloads that run for short durations and cannot be interrupted. They provide the flexibility to pay for compute capacity by the hour or second, with no long-term commitments. Compute Savings Plans and Convertible Reserved Instances are more cost-effective for longer-term, consistent usage but require a commitment over a 1 or 3-year term. Spot Instances offer the lowest prices but can be interrupted by AWS with little notice, making them unsuitable for workloads that cannot be interrupted.

  👍 3

  Yak_Yeti2024/12/13

• It is B: On-Demand Instances "We recommend that you use On-Demand Instances for applications with short-term, irregular workloads that cannot be interrupted."

  https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/ec2-on-demand-instances.html

  👍 2

  Naantje2024/07/24