Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate SAA-C03 topic 1 question 972 discussion

Keep in mind: WE NEED LOW LATENCY BLOCK STORAGE. A - FSx for Windows File Server is not designed for block storage. It is optimized for shared file storage. B - God this requires high implementation effort. C - FSx for NetApp ONTAP supports block storage (via iSCSI) and provides Multi-AZ fault tolerance out of the box. D - EBS io2 volumes with replication across AZs are hard and complex to configure and manage. Even if you think this is acceptable, still it's definitely much harder than option C.

The correct answer is C. Explanation: Option C: Correct. Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP provides a managed file storage solution that supports iSCSI protocol for block storage access, enabling low-latency, highly available access to shared storage across multiple Availability Zones. This solution requires less implementation effort because Amazon FSx manages the complex underlying multi-AZ configuration and data replication automatically. Option A: Incorrect. While Amazon FSx for Windows File Server provides a managed shared storage solution, it is primarily used for SMB-based file shares rather than block storage needs like those typically demanded by stock trading applications. Also, it might introduce additional latency for block-level access.

block storage => FSx for NetApp ONTAP not only provides iSCSI(for block) support, but also offers comprehensive protocol support including SMB and NFS.

Fsx windows file server does not provide block storage, also Ontap provides very low latency and provides various compatible storage including block

block means EBS, and I've searched but I don't see Fsx supporting shared block storage, not that I know of, and thinking about if it did exist, I would cost more than a replica- both operationally and money wise. And mostly we don't need complex methods so I'd go for D

Answer A. Although they are looking for Block storage which is EBS but EBS can't be shared across two availabilty zones . Multi-Attach feature: While you can use the "Multi-Attach" feature to attach a single EBS volume to multiple instances within the same Availability Zone, this does not allow sharing across different Availability Zones. Configuring NETAPP is not least operational.

Answer is A. Amazon FSx for Windows File Server provides fully managed shared storage designed for Windows workloads. It offers seamless integration with Windows applications and supports Windows Server Failover Clustering (WSFC), making it the ideal choice for clustering applications. High availability is provided as the cluster spans multiple Availability Zones, ensuring that the application continues to function in case of an AZ failure. Low-latency access to shared block storage is achievable with FSx, and it reduces the complexity compared to setting up replication between multiple Amazon EBS volumes. Least implementation effort: You don't need to manage block-level replication or create complex replication setups between AZs, as FSx for Windows File Server handles this automatically. It simplifies storage management and offers native Windows support.

Using Amazon FSx for Windows File Server would not be the best solution, as the company requires block storage, not file storage. D. Deploying the application on EC2 instances and using Amazon EBS Provisioned IOPS SSD (io2) volumes with EBS-level replication is the solution with the least implementation effort for the following reasons: EBS volumes provide the required block storage for the application. Using EBS-level replication to sync data between Availability Zones is a built-in feature, requiring less implementation effort compared to setting up custom replication mechanisms. Provisioned IOPS SSD (io2) volumes ensure the low-latency access to the block storage required by the application. By using Amazon EBS Provisioned IOPS SSD (io2) volumes with EBS-level replication, the company can meet the requirements for high availability and low-latency access to block storage with the least implementation effort.

block storage -> B or D io1, io2 support EBS Multi-Attach -> D

Key word in the question is block storage which eliminates A as a possibility. FSx for NetApp ONTAP provides low-latency block storage, multi-AZ high availability, and requires the least implementation effort because it is a fully managed service with built-in replication and failover capabilities. This makes it the most suitable and cost-effective option for the company's needs.

For those who are choosing option other than A: what part of "with the LEAST implementation effort" do you not understand?

Answer is B EFS is not Block Storage, EBS is.( Thus, A and C are out)

due to this line in question "low-latency access to block storage" C looks appropriate.

A - Windows cluster across two availability zones satisfies highly available condition and FSx satisfies storage access from multiple ec2 especially for Windows server. B - "Set up application-level replication to sync data" not for LEAST effort condition C, D - "in standby mode" need to be activated manually so its not highly available

Block storage

Windows = FSX