Pass the Amazon Web Services AWS Certified Data Engineer Data-Engineer-Associate Questions and answers with CertsForce

For near real-time processing of new files in S3, event-driven ingestion is optimal. S3 Event Notifications can trigger AWS Lambda to immediately load data into Amazon Redshift, eliminating latency associated with batch scheduling.

“Event-based triggers using S3 notifications and Lambda functions are effective for near real-time ingestion pipelines into Amazon Redshift.”

– Ace the AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate Certification - version 2 - apple.pdf

Option C (Glue bookmarks) is best for batch jobs, and zero-ETL applies to Aurora to Redshift, not S3.

Option B is the best solution to meet the requirements with the least operational overhead because S3 Object Lambda is a feature that allows you to add your own code to process data retrieved from S3 before returning it to an application. S3 Object Lambda works with S3 GET requests and can modify both the object metadata and the object data. By using S3 Object Lambda, you can implement redaction logic within an S3 Object Lambda function to dynamically redact PII based on the needs of each application that accesses the data. This way, you can avoid creating and maintaining multiple copies of the dataset with different levels of redaction.

Option A is not a good solution because it involves creating and managing multiple copies of the dataset with different levels of redaction for each application. This option adds complexity and storage cost to the data protection process and requires additional resources and configuration. Moreover, S3 bucket policies cannot enforce fine-grained data access control at the row and column level, so they are not sufficient to redact PII.

Option C is not a good solution because it involves using AWS Glue to transform the data for each application. AWS Glue is a fully managed service that can extract, transform, and load (ETL) data from various sources to various destinations, including S3. AWS Glue can also convert data to different formats, such as Parquet, which is a columnar storage format that is optimized for analytics. However, in this scenario, using AWS Glue to redact PII is not the best option because it requires creating and maintaining multiple copies of the dataset with different levels of redaction for each application. This option also adds extra time and cost to the data protection process and requires additional resources and configuration.

Option D is not a good solution because it involves creating and configuring an API Gateway endpoint that has custom authorizers. API Gateway is a service that allows you to create, publish, maintain, monitor, and secure APIs at any scale. API Gateway can also integrate with other AWS services, such as Lambda, to provide custom logic for processing requests. However, in this scenario, using API Gateway to redact PII is not the best option because it requires writing and maintaining custom code and configuration for the API endpoint, the custom authorizers, and the REST API call. This option also adds complexity and latency to the data protection process and requires additional resources and configuration.

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide

Introducing Amazon S3 Object Lambda – Use Your Code to Process Data as It Is Being Retrieved from S3

Using Bucket Policies and User Policies - Amazon Simple Storage Service

AWS Glue Documentation

What is Amazon API Gateway? - Amazon API Gateway

To reclaim the most storage space from a materialized view in Amazon Redshift, you should use a DELETE operation that removes all rows from the view. The most efficient way to remove all rows is to use a condition that always evaluates to true, such as 1=1. This will delete all rows without needing to evaluate each row individually based on specific column values like load_date.

Option A: DELETE FROM materialized_view_name WHERE 1=1;This statement will delete all rows in the materialized view and free up the space. Since materialized views in Redshift store precomputed data, performing a DELETE operation will remove all stored rows.

Other options either involve inappropriate SQL statements (e.g., VACUUM in option C is used for reclaiming storage space in tables, not materialized views), or they don’t remove data effectively in the context of a materialized view (e.g., TRUNCATE cannot be used directly on a materialized view).

The original query does not return results for all of the products because the year column in the sales_data table is not an integer, but a timestamp. Therefore, the WHERE clause does not filter the data correctly, and only returns the products that have a null value for the year column. To fix this, the data engineer should use the extract function to extract the year from the timestamp and compare it with 2023. This way, the query will return the correct results for all of the products in the sales_data table. The other options are either incorrect or irrelevant, as they do not address the root cause of the issue. Replacing sum with count does not change the filtering condition, adding HAVING clause does not affect the grouping logic, and removing the GROUP BY clause does not solve the problem of missing products. References:

Troubleshooting JSON queries - Amazon Athena (Section: JSON related errors)

When I query a table in Amazon Athena, the TIMESTAMP result is empty (Section: Resolution)

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide (Chapter 7, page 197)

The requirement is to detect violations of data access policies and receive notifications with the username of the violator. AWS CloudTrail can provide object-level tracking for S3 to capture detailed API actions on specific S3 objects, including the user who performed the action.

AWS CloudTrail:

CloudTrail can monitor API calls made to an S3 bucket, including object-level API actions such as GetObject, PutObject, and DeleteObject. This will help detect access violations based on the API calls made by different users.

CloudTrail logs include details such as the user identity, which is essential for meeting the requirement of including the username in notifications.

The CloudTrail logs can be forwarded to Amazon CloudWatch to trigger alarms based on certain access patterns (e.g., violations of specific policies).

Problem Analysis:

The company requires a centralized data warehouse for consolidating data from various sources.

They use Amazon QuickSight in direct query mode, necessitating fast response times for analytical queries.

Users query the data intermittently, with unpredictable spikes during the day.

Operational overhead should be minimal.

Key Considerations:

The solution must support fast, SQL-based analytics.

It must handle unpredictable spikes efficiently.

Must integrate seamlessly with QuickSight for direct querying.

Minimize operational complexity and scaling concerns.

Solution Analysis:

Option A: Amazon Redshift Serverless

Redshift Serverless eliminates the need for provisioning and managing clusters.

Automatically scales compute capacity up or down based on query demand.

Reduces operational overhead by handling performance optimization.

Fully integrates with Amazon QuickSight, ensuring low-latency analytics.

Reduces costs as it charges only for usage, making it ideal for workloads with intermittent spikes.

Option B: Amazon Athena with S3 (Apache Parquet)

Athena supports querying data directly from S3 in Parquet format.

While it’s cost-effective, performance depends on the size and complexity of the data.

It is not optimized for high-speed analytics needed by QuickSight in direct query mode.

Option C: Amazon Redshift Provisioned Clusters

Requires manual cluster provisioning, scaling, and maintenance.

Higher operational overhead compared to Redshift Serverless.

Option D: Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL

Aurora is optimized for transactional databases, not data warehousing or analytics.

Does not meet the requirement for fast analytics queries.

Final Recommendation:

Amazon Redshift Serverless is the best choice for this use case because it provides fast analytics, integrates natively with QuickSight, and minimizes operational complexity while efficiently handling unpredictable spikes.

Amazon Redshift Serverless Overview

Amazon QuickSight and Redshift Integration

Athena vs. Redshift

 Lambda layers are a way to share code and dependencies across multiple Lambda functions. By packaging the custom Python scripts into Lambda layers, the data engineer can update the scripts in one place and have them automatically applied to all the Lambda functions that use the layer. This reduces the manual effort and ensures consistency across the Lambda functions. The other options are either not feasible or not efficient. Storing a pointer to the custom Python scripts in the execution context object or in environment variables would require the Lambda functions to download the scripts from Amazon S3 every time they are invoked, which would increase latency and cost. Assigning the same alias to each Lambda function would not help with updating the Python scripts, as the alias only points to a specific version of the Lambda function code. References:

AWS Lambda layers

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide, Chapter 3: Data Ingestion and Transformation, Section 3.4: AWS Lambda

Amazon Redshift data sharing now supports bi-directional and selective write access through datashare namespaces.

This allows centralized management of permissions from headquarters while giving Regional clusters controlled write access to specific datasets — adhering to least privilege and minimizing admin overhead.

“Use Redshift datashares with write permissions and namespaces to enable controlled cross-Region data collaboration while maintaining centralized governance.”

– Ace the AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate Certification - version 2 - apple.pdf

This configuration ensures near real-time inventory updates, centralized access management, and compliance with AWS security best practices.

AWS Glue Data Quality is designed specifically to validate data as part of ETL pipelines with minimal cost and operational overhead. By creating a custom data quality rule, the data engineer can enforce business logic such as ensuring that the shipping date is later than the order date and that the delivery date is later than the shipping date.

Glue Data Quality rules run natively within AWS Glue ETL jobs, eliminating the need for additional services, duplicate queries, or post-processing steps. The service supports automatically identifying failed records and routing them to a separate Amazon S3 bucket, which directly satisfies the requirement to isolate invalid orders.

Using AWS Glue DataBrew introduces additional profiling and transformation steps that are unnecessary for a simple rule-based validation. Athena-based validation would require scanning data repeatedly, increasing query costs and adding complexity. AWS Glue crawlers only discover schema metadata and cannot enforce data quality rules.

From a cost and architecture perspective, Glue Data Quality integrates directly into existing Glue pipelines, avoids additional compute usage, and provides centralized monitoring of data quality metrics. Therefore, Option C is the most cost-effective and exam-aligned solution.

Amazon Aurora zero-ETL integration with Amazon Redshift Serverless is designed specifically to provide near real-time analytics on transactional data with minimal operational overhead. This integration continuously replicates changes from Aurora MySQL databases into Redshift Serverless without requiring data pipelines, replication tasks, or infrastructure management.

Because the requirement emphasizes near real-time latency and minimal management, zero-ETL integration is the optimal choice. It eliminates the need to configure and monitor AWS DMS tasks, manage Glue jobs, or build and scale Lambda-based ingestion logic. Schema changes, data synchronization, and replication are handled automatically by AWS.

AWS DMS Serverless, while managed, still requires task configuration and monitoring and typically introduces more latency than zero-ETL integrations. AWS Glue jobs and Lambda functions require custom code, scheduling, and error handling, increasing both complexity and maintenance effort.

Therefore, setting up Aurora zero-ETL integration with Amazon Redshift Serverless best satisfies the requirements and aligns with AWS best practices for modern analytics architectures.