Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Amazon Exam SAP-C02 Topic 5 Question 21 Discussion

Actual exam question for Amazon's SAP-C02 exam
Question #: 21
Topic #: 5
[All SAP-C02 Questions]

A company wants to design a disaster recovery (DR) solution for an application that runs in the company's data center. The application writes to an SMB file share and creates a copy on a second file share. Both file shares are in the data center. The application uses two types of files: metadata files and image files.

The company wants to store the copy on AWS. The company needs the ability to use SMB to access the data from either the data center or AWS if a disaster occurs. The copy of the data is rarely accessed but must be available within 5 minutes.

Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

The correct solution is to use an Amazon S3 File Gateway to store the copy of the SMB file share on AWS. An S3 File Gateway enables on-premises applications to store and access objects in Amazon S3 using the SMB protocol. The S3 File Gateway can also be accessed from AWS using the SMB protocol, which provides the ability to use the data from either the data center or AWS if a disaster occurs. The S3 File Gateway supports tiering of data to different S3 storage classes based on the file type. This allows the company to optimize the storage costs by using S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) for the metadata files, which are rarely accessed but must be available within 5 minutes, and S3 Glacier Deep Archive for the image files, which are the lowest-cost storage class and suitable for long-term retention of data that is rarely accessed. This solution is the most cost-effective because it does not require any additional hardware, software, or replication services.

The other solutions are incorrect because they either use more expensive or unnecessary services or components, or they do not meet the requirements. For example:

Solution A is incorrect because it uses AWS Outposts with Amazon S3 storage, which is a very expensive and complex solution for the scenario in the question. AWS Outposts is a service that extends AWS infrastructure, services, APIs, and tools to virtually any data center, co-location space, or on-premises facility. It is designed for customers who need low latency and local data processing. Amazon S3 storage on Outposts provides a subset of S3 features and APIs to store and retrieve data on Outposts. However, this solution does not provide SMB access to the data on Outposts, which requires a Windows EC2 instance on Outposts as a file server. This adds more cost and complexity to the solution, and it does not provide the ability to access the data from AWS if a disaster occurs.

Solution B is incorrect because it uses Amazon FSx File Gateway and Amazon FSx for Windows File Server Multi-AZ file system that uses SSD storage, which are both more expensive and unnecessary services for the scenario in the question. Amazon FSx File Gateway is a service that enables on-premises applications to store and access data in Amazon FSx for Windows File Server using the SMB protocol. Amazon FSx for Windows File Server is a fully managed service that provides native Windows file shares with the compatibility, features, and performance that Windows-based applications rely on. However, this solution does not meet the requirements because it does not provide the ability to use different storage classes for the metadata files and image files, and it does not provide the ability to access the data from AWS if a disaster occurs. Moreover, using a Multi-AZ file system that uses SSD storage is overprovisioned and costly for the scenario in the question, which involves rarely accessed data that must be available within 5 minutes.

Solution D is incorrect because it uses an S3 File Gateway that uses S3 Standard-IA for both the metadata files and image files, which is not the most cost-effective solution for the scenario in the question. S3 Standard-IA is a storage class that offers high durability, availability, and performance for infrequently accessed data. However, it is more expensive than S3 Glacier Deep Archive, which is the lowest-cost storage class and suitable for long-term retention of data that is rarely accessed. Therefore, using S3 Standard-IA for the image files, which are likely to be larger and more numerous than the metadata files, is not optimal for the storage costs.


What is S3 File Gateway?

Using Amazon S3 storage classes with S3 File Gateway

Accessing your file shares from AWS

Contribute your Thoughts:

Brock
24 days ago
Haha, can you imagine if we just went with option D and used S3 Standard-IA for everything? Talk about a one-size-fits-all approach. Though I guess it would be the most simple to set up. But where's the fun in that, right?
upvoted 0 times
Avery
7 days ago
Yeah, we should weigh the pros and cons of each option before making a decision
upvoted 0 times
...
Ciara
8 days ago
That could be a good solution for our needs, it's worth considering
upvoted 0 times
...
William
9 days ago
What about option A with AWS Outposts and Amazon S3 storage?
upvoted 0 times
...
Horace
10 days ago
I agree, we don't want to regret our choice later on
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamekia
11 days ago
True, but I feel like we should consider all our options before deciding
upvoted 0 times
...
Anthony
12 days ago
Option D sounds like the easiest choice, just keep it simple
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Floyd
25 days ago
Yeah, I'm with you on option C. It seems to hit all the requirements - cost-effectiveness, quick access, and using SMB to access the data. Plus, I like the idea of tiering the storage based on the file types. Keeps the costs down without sacrificing availability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antione
26 days ago
I don't know, option B seems a bit overkill for this use case. I mean, we're talking about rarely accessed data, so the performance of SSD storage might be a bit excessive. What do you guys think about option C? Using S3 Standard-IA for the metadata and Glacier Deep Archive for the image files could be a more cost-effective solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronnie
27 days ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. We need a solution that's cost-effective and can provide quick access to the data in case of a disaster. I'm leaning towards option B, the Amazon FSx File Gateway. It seems like the most straightforward solution, and the Multi-AZ file system with SSD storage should give us the performance we need.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77