AWS Certified Solutions Architect – Associate (SAA-C02) — Question 746

A company is deploying a new application to Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) with an AWS Fargate cluster. The application needs a storage solution for data persistence. The solution must be highly available and fault tolerant. The solution also must be shared between multiple application containers.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?

Answer options

• A. Create Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volumes in the same Availability Zones where EKS worker nodes are placed. Register the volumes in a StorageClass object on an EKS cluster. Use EBS Multi-Attach to share the data between containers.
• B. Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) file system. Register the file system in a StorageClass object on an EKS cluster. Use the same file system for all containers.
• C. Create an Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volume. Register the volume in a StorageClass object on an EKS cluster. Use the same volume for all containers.
• D. Create Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) file systems in the same Availability Zones where EKS worker nodes are placed. Register the file systems in a StorageClass object on an EKS cluster. Create an AWS Lambda function to synchronize the data between file systems.

Correct answer: B

Explanation

Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) is a fully managed, highly available shared storage service that natively supports ReadWriteMany (RWX) access, making it the ideal solution for multiple EKS containers to access the same volume. Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volumes are not supported as persistent storage for pods running on AWS Fargate. Additionally, using AWS Lambda to synchronize separate EFS file systems introduces unnecessary operational overhead compared to utilizing a single shared EFS file system.