You notice a larger than expected ingest delay from one of your high-volume streaming log...

The correct answer is C. Number of concurrent requests a sink is using .

CrowdStrike’s Falcon LogScale Collector sizing guidance states that in high throughput scenarios where the ingestion endpoint becomes a bottleneck, it can be beneficial to increase the number of concurrent requests a sink is using through the workers setting. The docs explicitly say this helps when the number of parallel requests is limiting throughput.

The same document also explains why D is wrong: increasing the memory queue size does not increase sink throughput. The queue exists to keep data available for the sink; if throughput is lower than the incoming data rate, the queue will eventually fill up anyway.

So:

C is correct because more sink workers can improve performance in high-volume conditions.

D is incorrect because queue size does not fix the throughput bottleneck.

A and B are not the documented tuning setting for this issue in the collector guidance.

==========