Answer:
A. Take regular EBS snapshots .
Explanation:
-
is incorrect. It lacks durability of EBS volumes.
-
is incorrect. ECT Instance stores are not durable.
-
is incorrect. Mirroring across EBS volumes is pargely inefficient.
-Since EBS snapshots only saves snapshots of the most recent device changes, a great deal of time and memory is saved. Also, only data unique to any particular snapshot is removed in cases of deletion.
The scenario you described suggests that the Law of Demand is correct.
Increase in price will always lead to loss of demand, while replacements for that product will grow in demand.
Answer:
(During write-off) March 11
Dr Bad debt expense $9,100
Cr Accounts receivable $9,100
(at the time of collection) March 29
Dr Accounts receivable $9,100
Cr Bad debts expense $9,100
Dr Cash $9,100
Cr Accounts receivable $9,100
Explanation:
On March 11, Dexter made an entry to write-off bad debts in the amount of $9,100. Dexter Co., charged it directly to Accounts receivable because the company uses direct write-off method. During the collection we have 2 steps to consider; First, On March 29 during the unexpected collection, Dexter shoud set up the reversal of the write-off entry which they had made last March 11. So we debit Accounts receivable and credit bad debts in the amount of $9,100. Second, is to record the collection, debit cash and credit Accounts receivable in the amount of $9,100.
