AWS Certified Solutions Architect Associate SAA-C03 Practice Question
A company is migrating an on-premises application to AWS. The application requires shared storage that provides low-latency access to data and supports standard file system features like file locking and hierarchical directories. The data is frequently updated, and the solution should be scalable and cost-effective. Which AWS storage service is the MOST appropriate to meet these requirements?
Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) is the most appropriate storage service for this scenario. EFS provides a scalable, fully managed Network File System (NFS) for use with AWS Cloud services and on-premises resources. It supports standard file system semantics such as file locking and hierarchical directories, which are essential for applications that require shared file storage. EFS is designed for low-latency access to data and scales automatically as files are added and removed, making it both scalable and cost-effective. Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) is object storage and does not support file system semantics like file locking or hierarchical directories. Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) provides block storage for EC2 instances and does not offer shared storage across multiple instances unless using EBS Multi-Attach, which has limitations and may not suit shared file system needs. Amazon S3 Glacier is intended for archival storage and is not suitable for frequently accessed data requiring low-latency access.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What are the key features of Amazon EFS?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does Amazon EFS differ from Amazon S3?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the limitations of using Amazon EBS for shared storage?