A records bureau must copy a large on-premises database to AWS and keep it in sync until cutover. Which migration approach pattern best fits that need?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Copy the books while the office is still open, keep updates flowing, then flip the sign at go-live. Database replication with ongoing sync is the migration pattern for that. Deleting first, printing everything, or guessing the data after killing the network are disasters waiting to happen.
Full Explanation
Database replication with ongoing sync until cutover best fits a records bureau that must copy a large on-premises database to AWS and keep it current until go-live. Continuous replication shrinks cutover risk compared with a stale one-time copy for municipal records.
Deleting the source database before any copy begins destroys the system of record. Printing the entire database to paper and rescanning it is not a viable migration pattern. Turning off all network paths and hoping a one-time guess recreates the data abandons integrity.
Exam caveat: Replication-until-cutover is a standard migration approach; big-bang without sync is riskier for large DBs. Operational check: establish replication, validate row counts/checksums, rehearse cutover with a freeze window, and document rollback if sync lag exceeds tolerance.
Municipal teams should keep a one-page decision record linking this Cloud Practitioner concept to resident outcomes, revisit it after major traffic or compliance changes, and ensure runbooks still match the chosen design.
Municipal teams should keep a one-page decision record linking this Cloud Practitioner concept to resident outcomes, revisit it after major traffic or compliance changes, and ensure runbooks still match the chosen design.