AWS Certified Developer – Associate (DVA-C02) — Question 12

A company has a multi-node Windows legacy application that runs on premises. The application uses a network shared folder as a centralized configuration repository to store configuration files in .xml format. The company is migrating the application to Amazon EC2 instances. As part of the migration to AWS, a developer must identify a solution that provides high availability for the repository.
Which solution will meet this requirement MOST cost-effectively?

Answer options

• A. Mount an Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volume onto one of the EC2 instances. Deploy a file system on the EBS volume. Use the host operating system to share a folder. Update the application code to read and write configuration files from the shared folder.
• B. Deploy a micro EC2 instance with an instance store volume. Use the host operating system to share a folder. Update the application code to read and write configuration files from the shared folder.
• C. Create an Amazon S3 bucket to host the repository. Migrate the existing .xml files to the S3 bucket. Update the application code to use the AWS SDK to read and write configuration files from Amazon S3.
• D. Create an Amazon S3 bucket to host the repository. Migrate the existing .xml files to the S3 bucket. Mount the S3 bucket to the EC2 instances as a local volume. Update the application code to read and write configuration files from the disk.

Correct answer: C

Explanation

The correct answer is C because using Amazon S3 provides a highly available and durable storage solution that is cost-effective for hosting configuration files. Options A and B involve using EBS and instance store volumes, which do not offer the same level of availability and scalability as S3. Option D is less cost-effective since mounting an S3 bucket as a local volume is more complex and may introduce performance issues compared to directly using the AWS SDK.