If an application is storing hourly log files from thousands of instances from a high traffic web site, which
naming scheme would give optimal performance on S3?
A.
Sequential
B.
instanceID_log-HH-DD-MM-YYYY
C.
instanceID_log-YYYY-MM-DD-HH
D.
HH-DD-MM-YYYY-log_instanceID
E.
YYYY-MM-DD-HH-log_instanceID
B. instanceID_log-HH-DD-MM-YYYY
D
http://www.aiotestking.com/amazon/which-naming-scheme-would-give-optimal-performance-on-s3/
I am sorry, D is not correct on this question
Sivaguru is correct, B instanceID_log-HH-DD-MM-YYYY
C is correct
Ref URL :
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/request-rate-perf-considerations.html
C is answer
C. instanceID_log-YYYY-MM-DD-HH
Ref URL : http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/request-rate-perf-considerations.html
D
If an application is storing hourly log files from thousands of instances from a high traffic web site, which naming scheme would give optimal performance on S3?
Sequential
instanceID_log-HH-DD-MM-YYYY
instanceID_log-YYYY-MM-DD-HH
HH-DD-MM-YYYY-log_instanceID (HH will give some randomness to start with instead of instaneId where the first characters would be i-)
YYYY-MM-DD-HH-log_instanceID
http://jayendrapatil.com/aws-s3-best-practices/
The good answer is the most random prefix
Each hour, all parameters are equals except instanceID because there are thousands of instances
So, it’s B or C
Not D because HH is the same for all instances at a given moment.
The mentionned URL is good:
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/request-rate-perf-considerations.html
You can read:
If you anticipate that your workload will consistently exceed 100 requests per second, you should avoid sequential key names. If you must use sequential numbers or date and time patterns in key names, add a random prefix to the key name. The randomness of the prefix more evenly distributes key names across multiple index partitions.
After that, i choose B because the next hour, the only change is the hour HH
So it’s more random than YYYY
C