DOP-C02 Question 72
Select 2A company is building a document processing application that requires high throughput for file storage and needs to be accessed concurrently by thousands of instances. The application must also store older files for long-term retention and regulatory compliance at minimal cost. Which combination of storage services should be used to meet these requirements?
- A
Use Amazon EFS for high-throughput, concurrent file access and Amazon S3 for long-term retention.
- B
Use Amazon EBS for high-throughput, concurrent file access and Amazon S3 Glacier for long-term retention.
- C
Use Amazon S3 for high-throughput, concurrent file access and Amazon EFS for long-term retention.
- D
Use Amazon EFS for high-throughput, concurrent file access and Amazon S3 Glacier for long-term retention.
- E
Use Amazon EBS for high-throughput, concurrent file access and Amazon S3 for long-term retention.
Show answer and explanation
Correct answers: A, D
Explanation
Amazon EFS is a scalable file system that supports high throughput and concurrent access, making it ideal for the application's active storage layer. For long-term retention, Amazon S3 offers cost-effective storage, while Amazon S3 Glacier is specifically optimized for archival and compliance workloads. Amazon EBS, on the other hand, is designed for single-instance use cases and does not meet the application's requirements for scalable, concurrent file access.
- A. Correct.
This option is correct because Amazon EFS is designed for scalable, concurrent file access across thousands of instances, while Amazon S3 is suitable for cost-effective long-term storage.
- B. Incorrect.
This option is incorrect because Amazon EBS is not ideal for high-throughput, concurrent file access across multiple instances. It is better suited for single-instance, low-latency storage.
- C. Incorrect.
This option is incorrect because Amazon S3 is not a file system and does not natively support concurrent file-level access required by the application. Additionally, Amazon EFS is not optimized for long-term retention.
- D. Correct.
This option is correct because Amazon EFS provides high-throughput and concurrent access, while Amazon S3 Glacier is optimized for long-term, low-cost storage for compliance and archival purposes.
- E. Incorrect.
This option is incorrect because Amazon EBS does not scale to support thousands of instances concurrently, and while Amazon S3 is suitable for long-term storage, EBS does not fit the high-throughput requirement.