Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 topic 1 question 20 discussion

A - Glacier Deep Archive can't be used for web hosting, regardless if the company says retrieval time is no concern.

A is correct. HA is not required here. D use Glacier deep archive that need hours to access that will cause time out for web

S3 Glacier Deep Archive will be the lowest cost.

The question does not require website hosting. Its focus is on securely storing documents so employees can access them via VPN without exposing them to the public Internet. So Glacier Deep Archive is more cost-saving

Buckets do not have a storage class... objects do! You can enable web hosting on any bucket and retrieve the objects (when available) over HTTP, whether the objects are available instantly or not that is another question. For glacier, you will have to request a restore and wait but when the object is eventually ready, you can download it directly over HTTP. So, the answer is D.

S3 glacier can be used for hosting as it requires additional steps to unarchive objects!

No, Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive cannot be used for web hosting. Reasons: Glacier Deep Archive is not designed for real-time access: Glacier Deep Archive is intended for long-term, infrequently accessed archival data. Retrieval times can range from 12 hours to 48 hours, making it unsuitable for serving content dynamically or in real-time through a website. No direct web hosting capabilities: S3 web hosting requires immediate availability of objects stored in the bucket. S3 Glacier Deep Archive is designed for delayed access, so objects stored in this class cannot be served directly. Storage class retrieval process: Objects stored in Glacier or Glacier Deep Archive require a retrieval job to be initiated before they are available for access. This process is asynchronous and incompatible with the demands of a web-hosting use case.

keywords: 'Archive documents, low requests, low availability and speed, LOWEST cost' = S3 Glacier Deep Archive

only A & D make sense, and since website hosting is also a requirement, I'll go with A.

The requirements are to store a large number of archived documents that are not publicly accessible, and make them available to employees through a corporate intranet. As the number of requests is low and speed of retrieval is not a concern, we can use the low-cost S3 One Zone-Infrequent Access (S3 One Zone-IA) storage class. We can configure the S3 bucket for website hosting and create an S3 interface endpoint to allow access to the documents only through the corporate intranet. This solution is the lowest cost as it eliminates the need to launch and manage EC2 instances. Option B and C involve launching an EC2 instance which increases the operational overhead and is more expensive than using S3. Also, EFS One Zone-IA storage class is not recommended for storing large files. Option D involves using the S3 Glacier Deep Archive storage class which is intended for long-term archival storage of data and not suitable for retrieving data frequently.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/storage-class-intro.html Store large number of archived docs, and available through corp intranet. Copies of data held on physical media elsewhere (could be re-created). Requests low (but it doesn't say RARE so think monthly/quarterly). "AVAILABILITY" and speed of retrieval are not concerns. It is A, yes Glacier is "cheaper", but I have to leave the archives for at least 180 days, would be available on corp intranet and it is more cost-effective if I want to migrate the data to Glacier if I monitor use and see it is "rarely" touched and know I have to hold it due to regulatory for at minimal 180 days.

While D is most probably the cheapest solution. When you try to download an object in deep archive you get a warning that it is not possible. You need to retrieve it: got to actions and restore which will need at least 12 hours for *deep* archive. Only after that you can access the document. The answer D says enable webhosting: thats afaik not going to work but users will end up in above mentioned warning. Therefore we need to go for A which is not as cheap but users can access the documents.

Given the requirements and the need for the lowest cost solution, the best option would be: A. Create an Amazon S3 bucket. Configure the S3 bucket to use the S3 One Zone-Infrequent Access (S3 One Zone-IA) storage class as default. Configure the S3 bucket for website hosting. Create an S3 interface endpoint. Configure the S3 bucket to allow access only through that endpoint. Options B and C involve launching EC2 instances which would add unnecessary complexity and cost since the company's priority is to minimize costs. Additionally, option D involves using the S3 Glacier Deep Archive storage class which is intended for long-term archival data and has longer retrieval times, making it less suitable for the given requirements.

Answer A. B and C are not relevant. D is close to create confusion but can't be used as an option for 2 reasons: 1. You can't create a S3 bucket with Glacier deep archive as a default storage class. Need lifecycle transition from any other S3 classes. 2. S3 Glacier deep archive can't be used for website hosting.

Option A - This option will work and S3 One Zone is a cheap storage solution for a large number of documents Option B - This option might not work: Nothing is said in the question about whether the Client VPN is connecting to a private subnet. Moreover, EFS might not be a cheap storage solution for a large number of documents Option C - This option might not work: Nothing is said in the question about whether the Client VPN is connecting to a private subnet. Moreover, EBS Cold HDD might not be a cheap storage solution for a large number of documents Option D - This option will not work: S3 Deep Glacier Vaults cannot be configured for static hosting. You would need to write an application for accessing the archives.

pay attention to "copies of data that is held on physical media elsewhere", this is hint for one zone. Using Glacier is possible in theory, but won't work out of box. Need to develop a whole new application to submit unarchive request when user request a file, wait for up to 48 hour, create the s3 link, notify the user and ask user to come back to view the file. This is ANOTHER application

For me is A. I'm not sure that S3 Glacier Deep Archive can be used as website. Also more than 12 hours to retrieve is so much for documental systems (also if is not a concern the speed up). Going with A