An organization has an existing Kafka estate. What must the design consider?
Why C is the answer
How Pub/Sub or Kafka fits its integration needs
An existing Kafka estate means that the design must weigh how Kafka or Pub/Sub fits its integration needs.
In detail
- Decide how Pub/Sub or Kafka fits its integration needs.
- Existing skills and clients count.
Use case
An illustrative scenario, not a real incident.
A firm runs Kafka widely, and a design weighs staying on Kafka against moving to Pub/Sub.
See it in different ways
flowchart LR
A["Events"] --> B["Pub/Sub"]
B --> C["Dataflow windows"]
C --> D{"Late event?"}
D -->|"Within allowed lateness"| E["Update the result"]
D -->|"Too late"| F["Drop or send apart"]
E --> G["BigQuery"]sequenceDiagram participant P as Producers participant S as Pub/Sub participant D as Dataflow participant B as BigQuery P->>S: Events S->>D: Delivered with event time D->>D: Windows and watermarks D->>B: Aggregates
flowchart TD
Q{"Is Kafka deeply embedded?"}
Q -->|"Yes"| A0["Consider keeping Kafka"]
Q -->|"No"| A1["Consider Pub/Sub"]Key point: Fit messaging to the current estate.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. The BigQuery slot edition
- Slot editions are about BigQuery capacity.
- B. The Cloud Storage class
- Storage class is unrelated to messaging.
- D. The worker machine type of each pipeline
- Machine type comes later.