A company runs an IoT application in the AWS Cloud. The company has millions of sensors that collect data from houses in the United States. The sensors use the MQTT protocol to connect and send data to a custom MQTT broker. The MQTT broker stores the data on a single Amazon EC2 instance. The sensors connect to the broker through the domain named iot.example.com. The company uses Amazon Route 53 as its DNS service. The company stores the data in Amazon DynamoDB. On several occasions, the amount of data has overloaded the MQTT broker and has resulted in lost sensor data. The company must improve the reliability of the solution. Which solution will meet these requirements?
Select one answer.
Marked answer: B
Community Discussion
Written by other learners. Comments can disagree with the marked answer — check the official documentation when in doubt.
Chose B1
Reliability & scale: AWS IoT Core is a managed MQTT broker built for millions of devices; no server bottleneck. Minimal changes: Use custom domain to keep iot.example.com, point to Data-ATS; define an IoT Rule to DynamoDB. Why not A/C/D: A: ALB isn’t for raw MQTT; complex, stateful scaling problem. C: Still a single EC2 broker → still fails under load. D: Greengrass ≠ cloud MQTT ingress service.
Chose B1
IoT Greengrass is designed for edge (on-premises/field) scenarios; it is not a replacement for a centralized, cloud-hosted MQTT broker.
