Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 topic 1 question 231 discussion

File Gateway == SMB , NFS Volumes Gateway == iSCSI Tape Gateway = VTL

Guys, options B and C are exactly same. :)

Ans D he most cost-effective solution for moving the backups to S3 is D. Deploy an AWS Storage Gateway volume gateway, create an SMB file share, and automate data copies to S3. Here's why: Cost-effectiveness: Volume gateways use Amazon EBS volumes for local storage, which is typically more cost-effective than Amazon FSx for Windows File Server for storing large amounts of data. Additionally, this approach avoids the need for additional backups within Amazon FSx, further reducing costs. Direct Connect utilization: Leveraging the existing Direct Connect connection optimizes network bandwidth for transferring data to S3, minimizing latency and potential data transfer charges. Automated backups: Automating copies of the nightly exports to S3 ensures reliable backups and minimizes manual intervention.

Option A

if you read the end of the following link's paragraph, its right there in documentation; https://aws.amazon.com/storagegateway/features/#Gateway_Types under " Amazon S3 File Gateway " Customers can use Amazon S3 File Gateway to back up on-premises file data as objects in Amazon S3 (including Microsoft SQL Server and Oracle databases and logs), and for hybrid cloud workflows using data generated by on-premises applications for processing by AWS services such as machine learning or big data analytics.

https://aws.amazon.com/storagegateway/features/

file gateway = most cheap

A - SMB mount = file gwy

file gateway -> used to store file inside s3 volume gateway -> used to store file in on-premises using iSCSI connectivity

Using Olabiba.ai to learn not to find an answer: Jack: Labiba, what is the Microsoft SQL Server database export is it block or file? oLabiba: The Microsoft SQL Server database export is typically a block-level backup. It captures the data at the database level, including the schema, tables, and records, and stores it in a binary format. This allows for efficient backup and restoration of the database. In summary, if you primarily need file-level access to your backups, File Gateway is a better choice. If you require block-level storage and want to optimize for low-latency access, Volume Gateway is a better fit. Let me know if you know the answer now.

File Gateway could be mapped as SMB file share and used by the database or other automation to transfer database backups. Volume Gateway is more used to perform volume snapshots on the on-premise system so I don't believe it's a sustainable approach here.

It's A (file gateway). Volume gateway is iSCSI.

olabiba.ai says D Option D: Using an AWS Storage Gateway volume gateway allows you to write the nightly database exports to an SMB file share on the volume gateway, which can be stored locally and automatically backed up to an S3 bucket. This solution is cost-effective as it utilizes the existing Direct Connect connection and requires minimal additional infrastructure.

d-d-d-d-d-d By deploying an AWS Storage Gateway volume gateway within the VPC connected to the Direct Connect connection, the company can leverage the high-speed, low-latency connection to transfer the nightly database exports to the SMB file share on the volume gateway. This allows for efficient and reliable data transfer. Automating copies of this data from the SMB file share to an S3 bucket provides a cost-effective solution for storing the backups in more robust cloud storage on Amazon S3. The company can take advantage of the durability, scalability, and cost-effectiveness of S3 for long-term storage.

Between A and D: write to local drive can also be a network drive mapped to the windows server. therefore SME file share is enough (A), D is Block level, for sure will cost more. the File Gateway is designed for file-level access and presents Amazon S3 storage as a file share, while the Volume Gateway provides block-level access and appears as local block storage volumes. The choice between the two depends on the specific needs and requirements of your applications and data access patterns.

I am between A and D. ChatGpt says A. But The reason why I think D is because, the question says backups are written to local drive(which means its a volume on onpremises machine). So I thought a volume can be attached to volume gateway. But ChatGPT says In terms of cost-effectiveness and simplicity, option A is a better choice. It involves using an AWS Storage Gateway file gateway, which directly stores the data as objects in Amazon S3 without the need for on-premises storage. This eliminates the complexity and costs associated with maintaining an on-premises volume gateway.