Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Professional SAP-C02 topic 1 question 16 discussion

C. Configure an Amazon CloudFront distribution. Point the distribution to an S3 bucket, and migrate the videos from EFS to Amazon S3. Amazon CloudFront is a content delivery network (CDN) that can be used to deliver content to users with low latency and high data transfer speeds. By configuring a CloudFront distribution for the blog site and pointing it at an S3 bucket, the videos can be cached at edge locations closer to users, reducing buffering and timeout issues. Additionally, S3 is designed for scalable storage and can handle high levels of user traffic. Migrating the videos from EFS to S3, would also improve the performance and scalability of the website.

No brainer

video ,unstructured content = Amazon S3 resolve buffering and timeout issues = Amazon CloudFront distribution

Not A as Max I/O increase IOPS but negatively impact latency, ultimately you will have little to no performance improvement. Also you cannot enable Max IO on an existing filesystem. Not B as this is not a cheap option (instance store generally cost more than EBS backed), also without a CDN there will be little performance improvement Not D as this provides performance improvements, but this provide comparable performance to option C at higher costs as in D videos are stored on EFS that cost more than S3 and all traffic goes trough CDN rather than only videos that actually needs eddge caching Thus C provide performance improvements (thanks for CloudFront) with cost-effective approach (S3 is cheap)

Option A - This option might not work and is not cheap: It will increase costs and has limited scalability. EFS is an expensive storage solution for videos Option B - This option might not work: Nothing is mentioned about whether the application is stateful or stateless and whether the ALB has client stickiness so using instance store could provide an inconsistent user experience. S3 is a cheap storage option Option C - This option will work and is cheap: A CloudFront distribution and S3 will provide the most scalability and availability possible from AWS; and both are very cheap options for distribution and storage of content Option D - This option might work but is not cheap: Moving all content to CloudFront ensures it will be served from the edge cache for the duration of the cache mitigating issues during high usage. However, nothing is said in the question about usage patterns, i.e performance issue will happen again for older content. Moreover, EFS is an expensive storage solution for video files compared to S3.

C. Configure an Amazon CloudFront distribution. Point the distribution to an S3 bucket, and migrate the videos from EFS to Amazon S3.

The most cost-efficient and scalable deployment that will resolve the issues for users, given the requirements and the described scenario, is: D. Set up an Amazon CloudFront distribution for all site contents, and point the distribution at the ALB.

Option C - Does not support new content added later by users, does not accelerate site content Option D - Accelerate site and videos, allow content added

C is good

C is good

obvious

No doubt it's C. To me the keyword there is scalable. S3 will be able to handle any amount of content users can generate. EFS is not the right solution for object storage, s3 is. EFS is a solution for a sharable network filesystem, that can be mounted and used by many operation systems.

C and D are both viable. But D would be less overhead as you would most likely need to reconfigure the web application more to get it working with S3. Option D with Elastic Beanstalk provides a higher level of abstraction and automates many aspects of the application management, which can reduce operational overhead and simplify the re-architecting process

C more cost efficient

C without a doubt

C is only option which meet their requirement

Configure an Amazon CloudFront distribution.