AWS Certified Solutions Architect – Professional (SAP-C02) — Question 416

A company has an application that has a web frontend. The application runs in the company's on-premises data center and requires access to file storage for critical data. The application runs on three Linux VMs for redundancy. The architecture includes a load balancer with HTTP request-based routing.

The company needs to migrate the application to AWS as quickly as possible. The architecture on AWS must be highly available.

Which solution will meet these requirements with the FEWEST changes to the architecture?

Answer options

• A. Migrate the application to Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) containers that use the Fargate launch type in three Availability Zones. Use Amazon S3 to provide file storage for all three containers. Use a Network Load Balancer to direct traffic to the containers.
• B. Migrate the application to Amazon EC2 instances in three Availability Zones. Use Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) for file storage. Mount the file storage on all three EC2 instances. Use an Application Load Balancer to direct traffic to the EC2 instances.
• C. Migrate the application to Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) containers that use the Fargate launch type in three Availability Zones. Use Amazon FSx for Lustre to provide file storage for all three containers. Use a Network Load Balancer to direct traffic to the containers.
• D. Migrate the application to Amazon EC2 instances in three AWS Regions. Use Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) for file storage. Enable Cross-Region Replication (CRR) for all three EC2 instances. Use an Application Load Balancer to direct traffic to the EC2 instances.

Correct answer: B

Explanation

Migrating the Linux VMs directly to Amazon EC2 instances preserves the virtual machine architecture with minimal changes, while Amazon EFS provides a fully managed, highly available shared file system that can be mounted simultaneously across multiple EC2 instances. An Application Load Balancer natively supports HTTP request-based routing, matching the existing load balancer setup. Containerizing the application as suggested in options A and C would require significant architectural changes, and option D is incorrect because Amazon EBS is block storage that cannot be easily shared across multiple regions.