SAP-C02 Practice Question 77: Lambda Graviton ARM64 Migration
AWS Certified Solutions Architect – Professional (SAP-C02) · Test 8 · question 7 of 10
A company runs about 200 AWS Lambda functions written in Python and Node.js on the x86_64 architecture. The functions are not memory-bound, and some use third-party libraries with native extensions, several Lambda layers, and a monitoring extension. The company wants to lower Lambda cost and improve performance with as little code change and risk as possible.
Which approach should the solutions architect recommend?
Show answer and explanation
Answer:
AWS states that Lambda functions that use the arm64 architecture (AWS Graviton2) *"can achieve significantly better price and performance than the equivalent function running on x86_64."* Migration is mostly a configuration change for interpreted runtimes, but AWS lists what must be checked first: each third-party library must provide an arm64 version, *"each layer"* and *"each extension"* must be compatible, and code uploaded as a package must be built for the target architecture. AWS recommends staging the deployment with *"alias routing configuration to split traffic between the x86 and arm64 versions"* to compare performance and latency (option C).
- A is wrong because doubling memory raises the cost of every invocation, and functions that are not memory-bound gain little. - B is wrong because moving 200 functions to containers is a large change that adds cluster and image management, with no assurance of lower cost. - D is wrong because a rewrite is the highest-risk and highest-effort approach and is not needed to get the price-performance benefit.
Reference: Selecting and configuring an instruction set architecture for your Lambda function