A developer is deploying a company's application to Amazon EC2 instances. The application generates gigabytes of data files each day. The files are rarely accessed, but the files must be available…

Question

Options

• AStore the files in an Amazon S3 bucket. Use the S3 Glacier Instant Retrieval storage class.
• BStore the files in an Amazon S3 bucket. Use the S3 Standard storage class. Create an S3
• CStore the files on an Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volume. Use Amazon Data
• DStore the files on an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) mount. Configure EFS lifecycle

• A
  76% (39)
• B
  14% (7)
• C
  6% (3)
• D
  4% (2)

Explanation

Option A is correct because S3 Glacier Instant Retrieval is purpose-built for data that is rarely accessed but requires millisecond (well within "minutes") retrieval - at a storage cost roughly 68% cheaper than S3 Standard, making it ideal for the 7-year retention window described.

Option B (S3 Standard) would work functionally but is significantly more expensive for data that is rarely accessed; S3 Standard optimizes for frequent access and charges a premium for storage that isn't needed here.

Option C (EBS) is block storage designed for low-latency I/O on actively running EC2 instances - it's expensive, not suited for archival workloads, and doesn't scale cost-effectively to gigabytes of infrequently accessed files.

Option D (EFS) is a managed network file system, also priced for regular use; while it has lifecycle policies, it costs more per GB than S3 and is intended for shared file access across instances, not long-term archival.

Memory tip: Think of the Glacier family as a spectrum - Instant = rarely accessed, retrieved in milliseconds; Flexible = rarely accessed, hours to retrieve; Deep Archive = almost never accessed, up to 12 hours. When the question says "rarely accessed + available within minutes," that's the Instant Retrieval sweet spot.

No community discussion yet for this question.