Amazon Redshift Data API for Real-Time Queries
A financial services company stores financial data in Amazon Redshift. A data engineer wants to run real-time queries on the financial data to support a web-based trading application. The data engineer wants to run the queries from within the trading application. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer B. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
This question tests the ability to select the most lightweight integration method for Amazon Redshift; the common trap is choosing traditional JDBC/ODBC which requires significant connection management overhead compared to the managed Data API.
The Amazon Redshift Data API provides a serverless, HTTPS-based interface for executing SQL queries, eliminating the need to manage database drivers or persistent connections. This solution offers the least operational overhead for web-based applications querying financial data in real-time.
Candidates often select JDBC (Option C) because it is the standard way to connect to databases, failing to recognize that managing persistent connections and driver updates constitutes higher operational overhead than using the managed Data API.
Community Discussion (12 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
The Amazon Redshift Data API is specifically designed to reduce operational overhead by providing a serverless HTTP endpoint for executing SQL commands. It handles connection pooling, authentication via IAM, and query execution without requiring the client application to maintain persistent TCP connections or install specific drivers like JDBC/ODBC. For a web-based trading application requiring real-time access, this matches the requirement for "least operational overhead" perfectly.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A is incorrect because Amazon Redshift does not natively support WebSocket connections for SQL queries. Option C (JDBC) requires managing network plumbing, driver versions, and connection lifecycle, which increases operational burden. Option D involves moving data to S3 and using S3 Select, which changes the data store entirely and likely introduces latency inconsistent with real-time requirements on the existing Redshift cluster.Community Comment Notes
Community consensus strongly supports Option B, with users noting that the Data API eliminates the need to manage persistent database connections. As one commenter paraphrased, it allows interaction without maintaining network plumbing or JDBC drivers, highlighting the efficiency gain. Another user explicitly stated that while JDBC is possible, the Data API is correct for minimizing effort inside an application.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
When asked for the "least operational overhead" for database interactions, prioritize managed services like APIs over direct driver-based connections (JDBC/ODBC), as they abstract away infrastructure maintenance tasks.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why not use JDBC for real-time queries?
JDBC requires managing connection pools, driver updates, and network configuration, which increases operational overhead compared to the serverless Data API.
Does Redshift support WebSockets?
No, Amazon Redshift does not support native WebSocket connections for SQL queries; it relies on JDBC/ODBC or the Data API.
Related Analysis
Practice All DEA-C01 Questions
Access 100 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full DEA-C01 Practice Test →