Free Amazon Web Services Data-Engineer-Associate Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 5

Option B is the best solution to meet the requirements with the least operational overhead because S3 Select is a feature that allows you to retrieve only a subset of data from an S3 object by using simple SQL expressions. S3 Select works on objects stored in CSV, JSON, or Parquet format. By using S3 Select, you can avoid the need to download and process the entire S3 object, which reduces the amount of data transferred and the computation time. S3 Select is also easy to use and does not require any additional services or resources.

Option A is not a good solution because it involves writing custom code and configuring an AWS Lambda function to load data from the S3 bucket into a pandas dataframe and query the required column. This option adds complexity and latency to the data retrieval process and requires additional resources and configuration. Moreover, AWS Lambda has limitations on the execution time, memory, and concurrency, which may affect the performance and reliability of the data retrieval process.

Option C is not a good solution because it involves creating and running an AWS Glue DataBrew project to consume the S3 objects and query the required column. AWS Glue DataBrew is a visual data preparation tool that allows you to clean, normalize, and transform data without writing code. However, in this scenario, the data is already in Parquet format, which is a columnar storage format that is optimized for analytics. Therefore, there is no need to use AWS Glue DataBrew to prepare the data. Moreover, AWS Glue DataBrew adds extra time and cost to the data retrieval process and requires additional resources and configuration.

Option D is not a good solution because it involves running an AWS Glue crawler on the S3 objects and using a SQL SELECT statement in Amazon Athena to query the required column. An AWS Glue crawler is a service that can scan data sources and create metadata tables in the AWS Glue Data Catalog. The Data Catalog is a central repository that stores information about the data sources, such as schema, format, and location. Amazon Athena is a serverless interactive query service that allows you to analyze data in S3 using standard SQL. However, in this scenario, the schema and format of the data are already known and fixed, so there is no need to run a crawler to discover them. Moreover, running a crawler and using Amazon Athena adds extra time and cost to the data retrieval process and requires additional services and configuration.

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

S3 Select and Glacier Select - Amazon Simple Storage Service

AWS Lambda - FAQs

What Is AWS Glue DataBrew? - AWS Glue DataBrew

Populating the AWS Glue Data Catalog - AWS Glue

What is Amazon Athena? - Amazon Athena

AWS Lake Formation is specifically designed to simplify fine-grained access control for data lakes stored in Amazon S3. By using Lake Formation tag-based access control (LF-TBAC), administrators can define access policies once and apply them dynamically based on tags rather than managing individual IAM policies.

LF-Tags can be assigned to databases, tables, and columns in the AWS Glue Data Catalog. Departments are granted permissions based on tags, ensuring that each department can access only the data it is authorized to view. This approach scales efficiently as datasets and departments grow, which is critical for data lakes ingesting millions of records daily.

Managing IAM policies per department is operationally complex and error-prone. Redshift-based access centralization limits flexibility and introduces unnecessary infrastructure. Syncing data into an RDS database adds cost, latency, and maintenance overhead.

Lake Formation provides centralized governance, auditing, and least-privilege enforcement with minimal administrative effort, making it the optimal solution.

Amazon RDS controls network-level access through security groups, which act as virtual firewalls. To allow an EC2 instance to connect to an RDS database using JDBC, the RDS security group must explicitly allow inbound traffic from the EC2 instance or its associated security group on the appropriate database port.

IAM roles do not control network connectivity to RDS databases. The ec2_authorized_hosts parameter does not exist for RDS engines. The Amazon RDS Data API is not supported for standard JDBC connections and is only available for Aurora Serverless v1 and v2.

Updating the RDS security group is the correct and simplest approach. By adding an inbound rule that allows traffic from the EC2 instance’s security group, the application can securely connect to the database without additional configuration or restarts.

Therefore, Option C is the correct solution.

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)

A “No space left on device” error typically results from data skew or large shuffle stages. The best actions are:

B. Monitor using Spark UI and Glue metrics to find skewed partitions or executor issues.

D. Use --write-shuffle-files-to-s3 to offload intermediate data to S3 instead of local disk, and apply salting to reduce skew.

“You can reduce the impact of data skew and large shuffle operations by monitoring with Spark UI and enabling the --write-shuffle-files-to-s3 option. Salting can help rebalance the skewed keys.”

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

Scaling out workers (A, C) is more costly and less efficient if the root cause (skew) is not fixed.

The data engineer needs to detect custom categories of PII within the data lake using AWS Glue DataBrew. While DataBrew provides standard data quality rules, the solution must support custom PII categories.

Option B: Implement custom data quality rules in DataBrew. Apply the custom rules across datasets.This option is the most efficient because DataBrew allows the creation of custom data quality rules that can be applied to detect specific data patterns, including custom PII categories. This approach minimizes operational overhead while ensuring that the specific privacy requirements are met.

Options A, C, and D either involve manual intervention or developing custom scripts, both of which increase operational effort compared to using DataBrew ' s built-in capabilities.

The Amazon EventBridge Scheduler offers a simple, serverless cron-based execution mechanism. It can trigger an AWS Glue ETL job that extracts data from Amazon RDS, formats it as CSV, and writes it to Amazon S3 — all without manual orchestration or servers.

“For scheduled data extraction and transformation, use AWS Glue jobs triggered by EventBridge Scheduler for fully managed, low-maintenance workflows.”

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

Glue natively integrates with RDS and S3, avoiding the need to manage Batch or EMR infrastructure.

Athena workgroups are a way to isolate query execution and query history among users, teams, and applications that share the same AWS account. By creating a workgroup for each use case, the company can control the access and actions on the workgroup resource using resource-level IAM permissions or identity-based IAM policies. The company can also use tags to organize and identify the workgroups, and use them as conditions in the IAM policies to grant or deny permissions to the workgroup. This solution meets the requirements of separating query processes and access to query history among users, teams, and applications that are in the same AWS account. References:

Athena Workgroups

IAM policies for accessing workgroups

Workgroup example policies

Option C is correct because the main performance problem here is the large number of very small files. AWS Glue documentation explains that for Apache Iceberg tables, managed compaction reduces metadata overhead and improves read performance by compacting many small objects into larger ones. AWS Glue also provides table optimizers for Iceberg, and compaction can be configured to run automatically. This directly addresses the requirement that performance should not degrade as more files are added over time.

Option A could help somewhat, but it adds more operational work and the crawler step is unnecessary noise for this question. With Iceberg tables in the Glue Data Catalog, the better answer is the native automatic compaction capability rather than a manually scheduled Glue job. Option B is incorrect because the Data Catalog does not simply compact files “every minute” by default; compaction is enabled and configured through the Iceberg table optimizer settings. Option D is insufficient because partitioning alone does not solve the small-files problem, and frequent crawler runs do not prevent long-term Iceberg degradation. The AWS-native, least-operations answer is to enable automatic compaction based on thresholds.

The correct answer is B because HNSW with the Faiss engine is the best fit when the system needs approximate k-NN search over millions of high-dimensional vectors while maintaining low latency and strong recall. OpenSearch approximate k-NN is designed for large, high-dimensional datasets where brute-force exact search becomes inefficient, and OpenSearch documentation shows HNSW configured with the Faiss engine for knn_vector fields. Exact search with a scoring script is accurate but does not scale well for 5 million vectors under a strict latency requirement. IVF can scale but usually requires training and tuning and may trade off recall. Binary quantization reduces memory but can reduce accuracy. Therefore, HNSW with Faiss is the strongest exam answer.