Amazon Web Services DOP-C02 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

The current design colocates the web tier, database, and cache on the same EC2 instances. This causes resource contention and makes it difficult to scale each layer independently. The correct solution is to separate these concerns into independently scalable managed services.

Option D uses an Application Load Balancer (ALB) in front of an Auto Scaling group for the web application. ALB is designed for HTTP/HTTPS traffic, supports path-based and host-based routing, and can spread load evenly across multiple instances and Availability Zones, eliminating the issue where one instance is overloaded.

The database is migrated to Amazon Aurora with Multi-AZ , which provides high availability, automated failover, and managed backups. Aurora offloads database management and ensures consistent performance.

For caching, Option D introduces Amazon ElastiCache for Redis , a managed in-memory cache that is purpose-built for low-latency reads, independent scaling, and high availability through replication and clustering.

Option A and C misuse NLB for HTTP traffic or for Redis exposure and introduce unnecessary complexity. Option B keeps Redis on EC2 (via NLB + ASG in a single AZ), which reduces availability and does not leverage managed caching.

Thus, Option D best separates tiers and improves performance and availability.

AWS Secrets Manager is a secrets management service that helps you protect access to your applications, services, and IT resources. This service enables you to easily rotate, manage, and retrieve database credentials, API keys, and other secrets throughout their lifecycle. Using Secrets Manager, you can secure and manage secrets used to access resources in the AWS Cloud, on third-party services, and on-premises. SSM parameter store and AWS Secret manager are both a secure option. However, Secrets manager is more flexible and has more options like password generation. Reference:

The core problem described is deployment inconsistency and lack of reliability caused by using AWS Systems Manager Run Command for application deployment. Run Command executes ad hoc commands and does not provide deployment orchestration, version tracking, lifecycle hooks, or health-based traffic control, which commonly leads to drift between EC2 instances.

The most reliable AWS-native solution is to adopt AWS CodePipeline combined with AWS CodeDeploy . Option B introduces a structured CI/CD pipeline with a clear build stage followed by a test stage , ensuring that only tested artifacts progress to deployment. Sequential build and test stages are preferred for reliability and deterministic behavior, especially when test results must gate deployments.

Option C is essential because AWS CodeDeploy is the service specifically designed to deploy application revisions consistently across EC2 fleets. By creating a CodeDeploy application and deployment group and integrating it with the ALB, deployments gain support for lifecycle events, health checks, instance synchronization, and automatic rollback. This ensures that all EC2 instances receive the same application version and that traffic is managed safely during deployments.

Option A introduces unnecessary parallelism that does not address the core issue. Option D adds excessive complexity with Lambda orchestration. Option E incorrectly replaces CodeArtifact with S3 without addressing deployment reliability.

Therefore, combining CodePipeline (B) with CodeDeploy and ALB integration (C) provides consistent, repeatable, and reliable deployments aligned with AWS best practices.