Google  Professional Data Engineer on Google Cloud Platform Exam  Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 10 Q 181-200

Visit here for our full Google Professional Data Engineer exam dumps and practice test questions.

Q181

A company wants to build a real-time analytics pipeline for online gaming events. The system must ingest millions of events per second, guarantee exactly-once processing, perform session-based and windowed aggregations, and provide low-latency dashboards for player engagement and in-game economy metrics. Which architecture is most suitable?

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery

Answer

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

Explanation

A) Cloud Pub/Sub, Dataflow, and BigQuery provide a fully managed, serverless architecture optimized for high-throughput, low-latency streaming analytics, ideal for online gaming telemetry. Cloud Pub/Sub can ingest millions of events per second from game clients, including actions, achievements, purchases, and chat events. Its auto-scaling ensures consistent ingestion even during peak traffic, such as tournament or seasonal events. Cloud Pub/Sub guarantees durable message delivery with acknowledgments, reducing the risk of lost events and ensuring reliability in the gaming pipeline.

Dataflow provides exactly-once processing, which is essential for accurate tracking of player engagement, in-game purchases, and leaderboard statistics. Stateful and windowed aggregations allow session-based metrics such as average playtime per session, concurrent players per server, and revenue per player over sliding time windows. Fraud detection can be integrated into Dataflow, enabling real-time identification of suspicious behaviors such as multi-account usage or unusual in-game purchase patterns.

BigQuery serves as the analytics engine for storing raw events and aggregated metrics. Its serverless, columnar architecture scales to petabytes of data and provides low-latency query performance. Analysts, product managers, and game designers can query data efficiently for dashboards, reporting, and ad hoc analysis. Integration with BI tools such as Looker or Data Studio allows real-time visualization of engagement trends, retention rates, and monetization metrics.

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery is a batch-oriented architecture. Processing stored events in batches introduces latency, which is unsuitable for real-time dashboards and monitoring. Dataproc requires cluster management, and exactly-once semantics are not guaranteed, potentially resulting in inaccurate metrics.

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery cannot scale to millions of events per second. Cloud SQL is designed for transactional workloads, while Cloud Functions have execution and memory limitations. Implementing exactly-once semantics and windowed aggregations at this scale would require complex orchestration and would not provide the necessary low-latency analytics.

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery can efficiently store raw events, but it lacks distributed stream processing and exactly-once guarantees. Implementing session-based and windowed aggregations would require additional orchestration, increasing latency and operational complexity. Queries for dashboards would also be less performant, making near real-time analytics difficult.

Q182

A company wants to store IoT telemetry data in BigQuery. Queries often filter by timestamp, device type, and region. The dataset is projected to reach petabytes. Which table design is most suitable for performance and cost efficiency?

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

B) Partition by device type and cluster by timestamp

C) Use a single unpartitioned table

D) Create multiple tables per device type and region

Answer

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

Explanation

A) Partitioning by ingestion timestamp ensures that queries filtered by time only scan the relevant partitions, significantly reducing the volume of data processed and lowering query costs. Clustering by device type and region organizes data within each partition, optimizing queries for commonly filtered dimensions. This design scales efficiently to petabyte-level datasets, maintaining consistent query performance as the dataset grows.

Partitioned and clustered tables reduce operational complexity, eliminating the need to manage multiple tables or datasets. The design supports both streaming and batch ingestion, enabling real-time anomaly detection, predictive maintenance, and trend analysis. BigQuery automatically manages partition metadata, optimizes queries, and scales compute and storage seamlessly. Queries combining timestamp, device type, and region filters run efficiently, minimizing cost and latency.

B) Partitioning by device type creates many small partitions, increasing metadata overhead and reducing query efficiency. Clustering by timestamp alone does not optimize queries filtered by region, leading to higher latency.

C) A single unpartitioned table is inefficient at petabyte scale. Queries filtered by timestamp, device type, or region scan the entire dataset, increasing cost and query time.

D) Multiple tables per device type and region increase operational complexity. Schema evolution, cross-device queries, and table maintenance become cumbersome. Queries spanning multiple tables require unions or joins, reducing efficiency and increasing operational risk.

Q183

A company wants to implement a GDPR-compliant analytics pipeline in BigQuery. Customer PII must be automatically detected, masked, or anonymized while still allowing analytics. Which GCP service is most suitable?

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

B) Cloud KMS

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy (IAP)

D) Cloud Functions

Answer

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

Explanation

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is designed to detect, classify, and transform sensitive data, including PII. It integrates with BigQuery, Cloud Storage, and Pub/Sub, enabling GDPR-compliant pipelines. DLP provides pre-built detectors for common PII types such as names, email addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, and financial identifiers. Transformations include masking, tokenization, redaction, and format-preserving encryption, allowing analytics on anonymized datasets while protecting sensitive information.

DLP can apply transformations inline during ingestion or query execution, reducing operational effort and ensuring compliance. Audit logs provide traceability, documenting how PII was detected and transformed. DLP scales to petabyte-level datasets, automating the protection of sensitive data and reducing compliance risk. This enables organizations to analyze data securely without exposing sensitive information while maintaining operational efficiency.

B) Cloud KMS secures encryption keys but does not detect or transform PII, making it unsuitable for GDPR-compliant analytics pipelines.

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy secures access to applications but does not provide automated PII detection or anonymization. It cannot enforce GDPR-compliant analytics.

D) Cloud Functions can implement custom PII detection and masking, but this requires development effort, is less scalable, and lacks the automation and reliability provided by Cloud DLP.

Q184

A company wants to monitor BigQuery query costs and trigger near real-time alerts for expensive queries. The solution must be serverless, scalable, and low-maintenance. Which approach is most effective?

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

B) Query BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually

C) Export logs to Cloud Storage and process offline

D) Store query metadata in Bigtable and poll for alerts

Answer

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

Explanation

A) INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables provide metadata about BigQuery jobs, including execution time, bytes processed, and costs. Cloud Functions can query these tables periodically to identify expensive queries and trigger alerts via Pub/Sub, email, or other notification channels. This serverless approach scales automatically with query volume and requires minimal operational effort.

Custom thresholds can be defined to monitor specific users, queries, or workloads. Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub enable near real-time monitoring and proactive cost management. This ensures that runaway queries are detected early, preventing unexpected billing spikes and allowing teams to optimize queries efficiently. The architecture is cost-effective, low-maintenance, and aligns with best practices for monitoring BigQuery query costs at scale.

B) Querying BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually is not scalable. Cloud SQL cannot efficiently handle large metadata volumes, and manual execution introduces latency, preventing real-time alerts.

C) Exporting logs to Cloud Storage and processing offline introduces delays, making real-time cost monitoring impractical.

D) Storing metadata in Bigtable and polling for alerts increases operational complexity. Polling is inefficient and does not scale as effectively as a serverless Cloud Functions + Pub/Sub solution.

Q185

A company wants to implement a multi-tenant SaaS analytics solution on BigQuery. Each tenant’s data must remain isolated, but occasional cross-tenant queries are required. The dataset will grow to petabytes. Which table design is most suitable?

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant

C) Store data in Cloud SQL and replicate to BigQuery

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant

Answer

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

Explanation

A) A single table with a tenant_id column and clustering by tenant_id is the most scalable, operationally efficient, and cost-effective design for multi-tenant SaaS analytics. Clustering improves query performance for tenant-specific filters and cross-tenant aggregations. Partitioning by ingestion timestamp further optimizes time-filtered queries.

This design scales to petabyte-level datasets without requiring management of multiple tables or projects. Cross-tenant queries are straightforward, requiring only filtering or grouping by tenant_id. Centralized schema management ensures consistent schema evolution. BigQuery’s serverless architecture automatically handles scaling, metadata management, and query optimization. This approach minimizes operational complexity, reduces costs, maintains high performance, and supports dashboards and ad hoc analytics efficiently while providing tenant isolation and analytical flexibility.

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant increases operational complexity, including billing, IAM configuration, and schema management. Cross-tenant queries are cumbersome and inefficient.

C) Storing data in Cloud SQL and replicating to BigQuery introduces latency and operational complexity, making it unsuitable for petabyte-scale multi-tenant analytics.

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant increase operational overhead. Queries across multiple tables require unions or joins, reducing efficiency and maintainability.

Q186

A company wants to build a real-time analytics pipeline for live sports event streaming. The system must ingest millions of events per second, guarantee exactly-once processing, perform session-based and windowed aggregations, and provide low-latency dashboards for fan engagement, viewership metrics, and sponsorship analytics. Which architecture is most suitable?

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery

Answer

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

Explanation

A) Cloud Pub/Sub, Dataflow, and BigQuery form a fully managed, serverless architecture optimized for high-throughput, low-latency streaming analytics, ideal for live sports telemetry. Cloud Pub/Sub can ingest millions of events per second from multiple sources, including live video feeds, viewer interactions, in-app clicks, and engagement events such as likes or shares. Its auto-scaling capability ensures consistent ingestion even during peak moments like game-winning plays or sudden scoring events. Pub/Sub also guarantees durable message delivery with acknowledgments, preventing data loss and ensuring accurate analytics.

Dataflow provides exactly-once processing, crucial for precise metrics on viewership, fan engagement, and sponsorship analytics. Its support for stateful and windowed aggregations enables session-based analytics such as average watch time per viewer, peak concurrent viewers, and total engagement per time window. Sliding windows allow near real-time monitoring of trends, and session windows track fan behavior across the live stream. Additionally, Dataflow supports integration with machine learning models for anomaly detection, such as detecting bot activity or unusual spikes in user engagement.

BigQuery acts as the analytics engine, storing both raw events and aggregated metrics. Its serverless, columnar architecture scales to petabytes of data while providing low-latency query performance. Analysts and marketing teams can query dashboards in real time for metrics like audience demographics, engagement patterns, and revenue from sponsorship impressions. Integration with Looker, Data Studio, or other BI tools enables stakeholders to visualize trends, optimize fan engagement campaigns, and adjust in-game sponsorship strategies dynamically.

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery is batch-oriented. Storing events and processing them in batches introduces latency, which is unsuitable for real-time dashboards and fan engagement monitoring. Dataproc requires cluster management, and exactly-once processing is not guaranteed, potentially leading to inaccuracies in viewership or engagement metrics.

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery cannot handle millions of events per second. Cloud SQL is optimized for transactional workloads, and Cloud Functions have execution and memory limits, making exactly-once processing and windowed aggregations at this scale difficult.

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery can store raw events efficiently but lacks distributed stream processing and exactly-once guarantees. Implementing session-based or windowed aggregations requires additional orchestration, increasing latency and operational complexity. Queries for dashboards would also be less performant, making near real-time analytics challenging.

Q187

A company wants to store IoT device telemetry in BigQuery. Queries often filter by timestamp, device type, and region. The dataset is projected to reach petabytes. Which table design is most suitable for performance and cost efficiency?

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

B) Partition by device type and cluster by timestamp

C) Use a single unpartitioned table

D) Create multiple tables per device type and region

Answer

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

Explanation

A) Partitioning by ingestion timestamp ensures that queries filtered by time scan only the relevant partitions, reducing the data scanned and lowering query costs. Clustering by device type and region organizes rows within each partition, optimizing query performance for common filters. This design scales efficiently to petabyte-level datasets, maintaining high performance as data grows.

Partitioned and clustered tables reduce operational complexity by eliminating the need to manage multiple tables or datasets. The design supports both streaming and batch ingestion, enabling real-time anomaly detection, predictive maintenance, and trend analysis. BigQuery automatically handles partition metadata, query optimization, and scaling of compute and storage resources. Queries filtering by timestamp, device type, and region run efficiently, minimizing cost and latency.

B) Partitioning by device type creates many small partitions, which increases metadata overhead and reduces query efficiency. Clustering by timestamp alone does not optimize queries filtered by region, leading to higher latency.

C) A single unpartitioned table is inefficient at petabyte scale. Queries filtered by timestamp, device type, or region would scan the entire dataset, increasing cost and query time.

D) Multiple tables per device type and region increase operational complexity. Schema evolution, cross-device queries, and table maintenance become cumbersome. Queries spanning multiple tables require unions or joins, reducing efficiency and increasing operational risk.

Q188

A company wants to implement a GDPR-compliant analytics pipeline in BigQuery. Customer PII must be automatically detected, masked, or anonymized while still allowing analytics. Which GCP service is most suitable?

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

B) Cloud KMS

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy (IAP)

D) Cloud Functions

Answer

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

Explanation

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is designed to detect, classify, and transform sensitive data, including PII. It integrates with BigQuery, Cloud Storage, and Pub/Sub, enabling GDPR-compliant pipelines. DLP provides pre-built detectors for common PII types such as names, email addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, and financial data. Transformations include masking, tokenization, redaction, and format-preserving encryption, allowing analytics on anonymized datasets while protecting sensitive information.

DLP can apply transformations inline during ingestion or query execution, reducing operational effort and ensuring compliance. Audit logs provide traceability, documenting how PII was detected and transformed. DLP scales to petabyte-level datasets, automating the protection of sensitive data and reducing compliance risk. This enables organizations to analyze data securely without exposing sensitive customer information while maintaining operational efficiency.

B) Cloud KMS secures encryption keys but does not detect or transform PII, making it unsuitable for GDPR-compliant analytics pipelines.

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy secures access to applications but does not provide automated PII detection or anonymization. It cannot enforce GDPR compliance in analytics pipelines.

D) Cloud Functions can implement custom PII detection and masking, but this requires development effort, is less scalable, and lacks the automation and reliability of Cloud DLP.

Q189

A company wants to monitor BigQuery query costs and trigger near real-time alerts for expensive queries. The solution must be serverless, scalable, and low-maintenance. Which approach is most effective?

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

B) Query BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually

C) Export logs to Cloud Storage and process offline

D) Store query metadata in Bigtable and poll for alerts

Answer

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

Explanation

A) INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables provide metadata about BigQuery jobs, including execution time, bytes processed, and costs. Cloud Functions can query these tables periodically to detect expensive queries and trigger alerts through Pub/Sub, email, or other notification channels. This serverless approach scales automatically with query volume and requires minimal operational effort.

Custom thresholds can monitor specific users, queries, or workloads. Cloud Functions with Pub/Sub enables near real-time cost monitoring and proactive query management. This ensures that runaway queries are detected early, preventing unexpected billing spikes and allowing teams to optimize queries efficiently. This architecture is cost-effective, low-maintenance, and aligns with best practices for monitoring BigQuery query costs at scale.

B) Querying BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually is not scalable. Cloud SQL cannot handle large metadata efficiently, and manual execution introduces latency, preventing real-time alerts.

C) Exporting logs to Cloud Storage and processing offline introduces delays, making near real-time monitoring impractical.

D) Storing metadata in Bigtable and polling for alerts increases operational complexity. Polling is inefficient and does not scale as effectively as Cloud Functions + Pub/Sub.

Q190

A company wants to implement a multi-tenant SaaS analytics solution on BigQuery. Each tenant’s data must remain isolated, but occasional cross-tenant queries are required. The dataset will grow to petabytes. Which table design is most suitable?

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant

C) Store data in Cloud SQL and replicate to BigQuery

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant

Answer

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

Explanation

A) A single table with a tenant_id column and clustering by tenant_id is the most scalable, operationally efficient, and cost-effective design for multi-tenant SaaS analytics. Clustering improves query performance for tenant-specific filters and cross-tenant aggregations. Partitioning by ingestion timestamp further optimizes time-filtered queries.

This design scales to petabyte-level datasets without requiring the management of multiple tables or projects. Cross-tenant queries are straightforward, requiring only filtering or grouping by tenant_id. Centralized schema management ensures consistent schema evolution. BigQuery’s serverless architecture automatically handles scaling, metadata management, and query optimization. This approach minimizes operational complexity, reduces costs, maintains high performance, and supports dashboards and ad hoc analytics efficiently while providing tenant isolation and analytical flexibility.

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant increases operational complexity, including billing, IAM configuration, and schema management. Cross-tenant queries are cumbersome and inefficient.

C) Storing data in Cloud SQL and replicating to BigQuery introduces latency and operational complexity, making it unsuitable for petabyte-scale multi-tenant analytics.

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant increase operational overhead. Queries across multiple tables require unions or joins, reducing efficiency and maintainability.

Q191

A media company wants to build a real-time recommendation system for video content. The system must ingest millions of user interaction events per second, guarantee exactly-once processing, perform session-based aggregations, and provide low-latency dashboards for content consumption metrics and personalization. Which architecture is most suitable?

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery

Answer

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

Explanation

A) Cloud Pub/Sub, Dataflow, and BigQuery form a fully managed, serverless architecture optimized for high-throughput, low-latency streaming analytics. Cloud Pub/Sub can ingest millions of events per second from various sources including video plays, likes, comments, and shares. Its auto-scaling capability ensures consistent ingestion even during spikes in traffic, such as during viral video releases or popular live streams. Pub/Sub guarantees durable message delivery using acknowledgments, preventing data loss and ensuring the reliability of event tracking.

Dataflow provides exactly-once processing, critical for accurate session-based aggregations, such as average viewing time per session, most-watched videos per demographic, and engagement trends. Stateful processing allows tracking of user sessions across multiple interactions, while windowed aggregations enable near real-time analytics, such as detecting trending content or high-value interactions that inform personalized recommendations. Integration with machine learning models can enhance recommendations, allowing predictive analytics that adapts in real time to user behavior.

BigQuery acts as the analytics engine, storing both raw events and aggregated metrics. Its serverless columnar architecture scales to petabyte-level datasets while providing low-latency query performance. Content managers and product teams can generate dashboards and ad hoc reports to monitor engagement, content performance, and personalization effectiveness. Integration with Looker, Data Studio, or other BI tools allows real-time visualization of trends, enabling data-driven decisions.

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery is batch-oriented. Processing stored events in batches introduces latency, which is unsuitable for real-time dashboards and personalized recommendations. Dataproc requires cluster management, and exactly-once semantics are not guaranteed, risking inaccurate analytics.

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery cannot scale to millions of events per second. Cloud SQL is optimized for transactional workloads, and Cloud Functions have execution and memory limitations. Implementing exactly-once processing and windowed aggregations at this scale would require complex orchestration.

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery can store raw events efficiently but lacks distributed stream processing and exactly-once guarantees. Implementing session-based or windowed aggregations requires additional orchestration, increasing latency and operational complexity. Query performance for dashboards would also be suboptimal.

Q192

A company wants to store IoT telemetry data in BigQuery. Queries often filter by timestamp, device type, and region. The dataset is projected to grow to petabytes. Which table design is most suitable for performance and cost efficiency?

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

B) Partition by device type and cluster by timestamp

C) Use a single unpartitioned table

D) Create multiple tables per device type and region

Answer

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

Explanation

A) Partitioning by ingestion timestamp ensures that queries filtered by time scan only the relevant partitions, reducing data scanned and lowering query costs. Clustering by device type and region organizes rows within each partition, optimizing queries for commonly filtered dimensions. This design scales efficiently to petabyte-level datasets while maintaining consistent query performance.

Partitioned and clustered tables reduce operational complexity by avoiding the need to manage multiple tables. Streaming and batch ingestion are both supported, enabling real-time anomaly detection, predictive maintenance, and trend analysis. BigQuery automatically handles partition metadata, query optimization, and scaling of compute and storage. Queries combining timestamp, device type, and region filters run efficiently, minimizing cost and latency.

B) Partitioning by device type creates many small partitions, increasing metadata overhead and reducing query efficiency. Clustering by timestamp alone does not optimize queries filtered by region, resulting in higher latency.

C) A single unpartitioned table is inefficient at petabyte scale. Queries filtered by timestamp, device type, or region would scan the entire dataset, increasing cost and query time.

D) Multiple tables per device type and region increase operational complexity. Schema evolution, cross-device queries, and table maintenance become cumbersome. Queries spanning multiple tables require unions or joins, reducing efficiency and increasing operational risk.

Q193

A company wants to implement a GDPR-compliant analytics pipeline in BigQuery. Customer PII must be automatically detected, masked, or anonymized while still allowing analytics. Which GCP service is most suitable?

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

B) Cloud KMS

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy (IAP)

D) Cloud Functions

Answer

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

Explanation

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is specifically designed to detect, classify, and transform sensitive data, including PII. It integrates with BigQuery, Cloud Storage, and Pub/Sub, enabling GDPR-compliant pipelines. DLP provides pre-built detectors for PII types such as names, email addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, and financial information. Transformations include masking, tokenization, redaction, and format-preserving encryption, allowing analytics on anonymized datasets while protecting sensitive data.

DLP can apply transformations inline during ingestion or query execution, reducing operational overhead and ensuring compliance. Audit logs document PII detection and transformation, providing full traceability. DLP scales to petabyte-level datasets, automating protection of sensitive data and reducing compliance risk. Organizations can perform analytics securely without exposing sensitive information while maintaining operational efficiency.

B) Cloud KMS secures encryption keys but does not detect or transform PII, making it unsuitable for GDPR-compliant analytics pipelines.

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy secures access to applications but does not provide automated PII detection or anonymization. It cannot enforce GDPR compliance in analytics pipelines.

D) Cloud Functions can implement custom PII detection and masking, but this requires development effort, is less scalable, and lacks the automation and reliability of Cloud DLP.

Q194

A company wants to monitor BigQuery query costs and trigger near real-time alerts for expensive queries. The solution must be serverless, scalable, and low-maintenance. Which approach is most effective?

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

B) Query BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually

C) Export logs to Cloud Storage and process offline

D) Store query metadata in Bigtable and poll for alerts

Answer

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

Explanation

A) INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables provide metadata about BigQuery jobs, including execution time, bytes processed, and costs. Cloud Functions can query these tables periodically to detect expensive queries and trigger alerts through Pub/Sub, email, or other notification channels. This serverless solution scales automatically with query volume and requires minimal operational effort.

Custom thresholds can monitor specific users, queries, or workloads. Cloud Functions combined with Pub/Sub enables near real-time cost monitoring and proactive query management. This ensures that runaway queries are detected early, preventing unexpected billing spikes and allowing teams to optimize queries efficiently. This architecture is cost-effective, low-maintenance, and aligns with best practices for monitoring BigQuery query costs at scale.

B) Querying BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually is not scalable. Cloud SQL cannot efficiently handle large volumes of metadata, and manual execution introduces latency, preventing real-time alerts.

C) Exporting logs to Cloud Storage and processing offline introduces delays, making near real-time monitoring impractical.

D) Storing metadata in Bigtable and polling for alerts increases operational complexity. Polling is inefficient and does not scale as effectively as a serverless Cloud Functions + Pub/Sub solution.

Q195

A company wants to implement a multi-tenant SaaS analytics solution on BigQuery. Each tenant’s data must remain isolated, but occasional cross-tenant queries are required. The dataset will grow to petabytes. Which table design is most suitable?

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant

C) Store data in Cloud SQL and replicate to BigQuery

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant

Answer

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

Explanation

A) A single table with a tenant_id column and clustering by tenant_id is the most scalable, operationally efficient, and cost-effective design for multi-tenant SaaS analytics. Clustering improves query performance for tenant-specific filters and cross-tenant aggregations. Partitioning by ingestion timestamp further optimizes time-based queries.

This design scales to petabyte-level datasets without requiring management of multiple tables or projects. Cross-tenant queries are straightforward, requiring only filtering or grouping by tenant_id. Centralized schema management ensures consistent schema evolution. BigQuery’s serverless architecture automatically handles scaling, metadata management, and query optimization. This approach minimizes operational complexity, reduces costs, maintains high performance, and supports dashboards and ad hoc analytics efficiently while providing tenant isolation and analytical flexibility.

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant increases operational complexity, including billing, IAM configuration, and schema management. Cross-tenant queries are cumbersome and inefficient.

C) Storing data in Cloud SQL and replicating to BigQuery introduces latency and operational complexity, making it unsuitable for petabyte-scale multi-tenant analytics.

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant increase operational overhead. Queries across multiple tables require unions or joins, reducing efficiency and maintainability.

Q196

A global e-commerce company wants to build a real-time analytics system for order tracking and customer behavior. The system must ingest millions of events per second, guarantee exactly-once processing, perform session-based and windowed aggregations, and provide low-latency dashboards for sales, inventory, and marketing teams. Which architecture is most suitable?

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery

Answer

A) Cloud Pub/Sub → Dataflow → BigQuery

Explanation

A) Cloud Pub/Sub, Dataflow, and BigQuery provide a serverless, fully managed, high-throughput, low-latency streaming analytics architecture suitable for global e-commerce. Cloud Pub/Sub can ingest millions of events per second, such as order placements, cart updates, product views, and customer interactions. Its auto-scaling ensures reliable ingestion during peak sales events like Black Friday, while acknowledgment-based delivery ensures no event is lost.

Dataflow provides exactly-once processing, which is critical for maintaining accurate sales and inventory metrics. Stateful and windowed aggregations allow session-based analytics, such as average purchase time per session, conversion rates per marketing channel, and revenue per time window. Sliding or tumbling windows provide near real-time insights. Dataflow can also integrate machine learning models for predictive analytics, such as identifying customers likely to abandon carts or detecting fraudulent orders.

BigQuery stores raw events and aggregated metrics. Its serverless, columnar architecture scales to petabytes and allows low-latency queries for dashboards and ad hoc reporting. Sales, inventory, and marketing teams can analyze real-time data using Looker, Data Studio, or other BI tools. Alerts and dashboards can visualize KPIs such as revenue trends, top-selling products, inventory levels, and customer engagement metrics.

B) Cloud Storage → Dataproc → BigQuery is batch-oriented. Batch processing introduces latency that is unsuitable for real-time dashboards. Dataproc clusters require management, and exactly-once guarantees are not inherently supported, risking duplicate or missing events.

C) Cloud SQL → Cloud Functions → BigQuery cannot scale to millions of events per second. Cloud SQL is designed for transactional workloads, and Cloud Functions have execution and memory limits. Achieving exactly-once processing and windowed aggregations at this scale would be operationally complex and inefficient.

D) Bigtable → Cloud Run → BigQuery can store raw events efficiently but lacks distributed stream processing and exactly-once guarantees. Implementing session-based or windowed aggregations requires additional orchestration, increasing latency and operational complexity. Query performance for dashboards would also be suboptimal.

Q197

A company wants to store IoT telemetry data in BigQuery. Queries frequently filter by timestamp, device type, and region. The dataset will reach petabyte scale. Which table design is most suitable for performance and cost efficiency?

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

B) Partition by device type and cluster by timestamp

C) Use a single unpartitioned table

D) Create multiple tables per device type and region

Answer

A) Partition by ingestion timestamp and cluster by device type and region

Explanation

A) Partitioning by ingestion timestamp ensures that queries filtered by time scan only relevant partitions, reducing the amount of data processed and lowering query costs. Clustering by device type and region organizes rows within each partition, improving query performance for commonly filtered dimensions. This approach scales efficiently to petabyte-level datasets while maintaining query performance as data grows.

Partitioned and clustered tables reduce operational complexity, eliminating the need for multiple tables. Streaming and batch ingestion are supported, enabling real-time analytics, anomaly detection, and predictive maintenance. BigQuery automatically manages partition metadata, query optimization, and scaling of compute and storage resources. Queries combining timestamp, device type, and region filters run efficiently, minimizing latency and cost.

B) Partitioning by device type creates many small partitions, increasing metadata overhead and reducing query efficiency. Clustering by timestamp alone does not optimize queries filtered by region, resulting in higher latency.

C) A single unpartitioned table is inefficient at petabyte scale. Queries filtered by timestamp, device type, or region would scan the entire dataset, increasing costs and latency.

D) Multiple tables per device type and region increase operational complexity. Schema evolution, cross-device queries, and table maintenance become cumbersome. Queries spanning multiple tables require unions or joins, reducing efficiency and increasing operational risk.

Q198

A company wants to implement a GDPR-compliant analytics pipeline in BigQuery. Customer PII must be automatically detected, masked, or anonymized while still allowing analytics. Which GCP service is most suitable?

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

B) Cloud KMS

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy (IAP)

D) Cloud Functions

Answer

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP)

Explanation

A) Cloud Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is designed to detect, classify, and transform sensitive data, including PII. It integrates with BigQuery, Cloud Storage, and Pub/Sub, enabling GDPR-compliant analytics pipelines. DLP provides pre-built detectors for common PII types such as names, email addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, and financial identifiers. Transformations include masking, tokenization, redaction, and format-preserving encryption, enabling analytics on anonymized datasets while protecting sensitive information.

DLP can apply transformations inline during ingestion or query execution, reducing operational effort and ensuring compliance. Audit logs provide traceability, documenting how PII was detected and transformed. DLP scales to petabyte-level datasets, automating sensitive data protection and reducing compliance risk. Organizations can analyze data securely without exposing sensitive information while maintaining operational efficiency.

B) Cloud KMS secures encryption keys but does not detect or transform PII, making it unsuitable for GDPR-compliant analytics pipelines.

C) Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy secures access to applications but does not provide automated PII detection or anonymization. It cannot enforce GDPR compliance in analytics pipelines.

D) Cloud Functions can implement custom PII detection and masking, but this approach requires development effort, is less scalable, and lacks the automation and reliability of Cloud DLP.

Q199

A company wants to monitor BigQuery query costs and trigger near real-time alerts for expensive queries. The solution must be serverless, scalable, and low-maintenance. Which approach is most effective?

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

B) Query BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually

C) Export logs to Cloud Storage and process offline

D) Store query metadata in Bigtable and poll for alerts

Answer

A) Query INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables with Cloud Functions and Pub/Sub alerts

Explanation

A) INFORMATION_SCHEMA tables provide metadata about BigQuery jobs, including execution time, bytes processed, and costs. Cloud Functions can query these tables periodically to detect expensive queries and trigger alerts via Pub/Sub, email, or other channels. This serverless approach scales automatically with query volume and requires minimal operational effort.

Custom thresholds can monitor specific users, queries, or workloads. Cloud Functions combined with Pub/Sub enables near real-time monitoring and proactive cost management. This ensures runaway queries are detected early, preventing unexpected billing spikes and allowing teams to optimize queries efficiently. The architecture is cost-effective, low-maintenance, and follows best practices for monitoring BigQuery costs at scale.

B) Querying BigQuery from Cloud SQL manually is not scalable. Cloud SQL cannot efficiently handle large metadata volumes, and manual execution introduces latency, preventing real-time alerts.

C) Exporting logs to Cloud Storage and processing offline introduces delays, making near real-time monitoring impractical.

D) Storing metadata in Bigtable and polling for alerts increases operational complexity. Polling is inefficient and does not scale as effectively as Cloud Functions + Pub/Sub.

Q200

A company wants to implement a multi-tenant SaaS analytics solution on BigQuery. Each tenant’s data must remain isolated, but occasional cross-tenant queries are required. The dataset will grow to petabytes. Which table design is most suitable?

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant

C) Store data in Cloud SQL and replicate to BigQuery

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant

Answer

A) Single table with tenant_id column and clustered by tenant_id

Explanation

A) A single table with a tenant_id column and clustering by tenant_id is the most scalable, operationally efficient, and cost-effective design for multi-tenant SaaS analytics. This approach leverages BigQuery’s strengths in handling large-scale datasets while maintaining tenant isolation. By clustering data on tenant_id, queries that filter or aggregate by tenant run significantly faster because BigQuery can skip unnecessary blocks of data, reducing the amount of scanned data and, therefore, query costs.

Partitioning the table by ingestion timestamp further enhances query performance, especially for time-series or recent data queries. Partitioning combined with clustering ensures that queries restricted to specific tenants and time ranges are executed efficiently, which is critical for SaaS workloads where analytics dashboards often focus on recent or specific periods of data. This design also eliminates the need for multiple tables or projects, simplifying schema management and operational tasks, even as the dataset grows to petabytes in size.

Cross-tenant queries are straightforward with this model. Aggregations or comparisons across tenants can be performed using simple SQL queries by including GROUP BY tenant_id or appropriate filters. This centralized approach ensures that analytics teams can easily run ad hoc queries or generate reports spanning multiple tenants without complex data federation or union operations. Furthermore, using a single table ensures consistent schema evolution, reducing the risk of errors and discrepancies across tenants. BigQuery’s serverless architecture automatically handles scaling, query optimization, and metadata management, minimizing operational overhead.

Operationally, this model provides high performance with minimal maintenance effort. There is no need to manage multiple projects or individual tables per tenant, which can introduce complexity, especially when dealing with schema updates, access control, and cost tracking. Additionally, clustering and partitioning reduce query costs because BigQuery reads only the relevant data blocks for a given tenant and timeframe. This approach also supports advanced analytics such as machine learning on multi-tenant data, anomaly detection, and predictive modeling efficiently.

B) Separate BigQuery projects per tenant might seem appealing for strict isolation. However, this approach significantly increases operational complexity. Managing hundreds or thousands of projects requires additional configuration for IAM policies, billing, dataset lifecycle, and schema updates. Cross-tenant queries become cumbersome because they often require UNION ALL operations across multiple projects or even data transfer operations, which increase latency and reduce query efficiency. For large-scale datasets, this approach is operationally prohibitive and costly.

C) Storing data in Cloud SQL and replicating it to BigQuery adds unnecessary complexity and latency. Cloud SQL is not designed for petabyte-scale analytical workloads; querying and aggregating massive datasets in a relational database would be extremely inefficient. Replication pipelines introduce additional points of failure and require monitoring and maintenance. For multi-tenant SaaS analytics with growing datasets, this design is unsuitable.

D) Multiple unpartitioned tables per tenant might provide isolation at a conceptual level, but they introduce significant operational overhead. Every new tenant requires table creation, schema updates must be applied to all tables, and cross-tenant queries require UNION ALL or join operations, which are inefficient at scale. Unpartitioned tables also result in higher query costs and slower performance because every query must scan the full table regardless of time filters.

 A single, clustered, and optionally partitioned table provides the ideal balance of tenant isolation, scalability, performance, and cost efficiency. It allows simple cross-tenant queries, minimizes operational overhead, and is fully compatible with BigQuery’s serverless, petabyte-scale analytics capabilities. For multi-tenant SaaS analytics at scale, this is the most recommended design.