An organization stores files on Amazon S3. Employees download the files, edit them with the same file name to the same folder on Amazon S3. Occasionally the files are unintentionally modified or…

Question

Options

• AEnable cross-region replication on the Amazon S3 bucket
• BEnable versioning on the Amazon S3 bucket
• CUse Lifecycle Management to move the files to Amazon Glacier
• DCopy the edited files to Amazon Elastic File System

• A
  5% (1)
• B
  95% (20)

Explanation

S3 Versioning (option B) is the most cost-effective solution because it automatically retains every version of an object whenever it is overwritten or deleted - allowing recovery of any previous state with no additional infrastructure or manual processes required.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (Cross-region replication) replicates objects to another region for disaster recovery, but it copies the current (potentially corrupted) version - it does not protect against accidental overwrites or deletes.
• C (Lifecycle to Glacier) archives objects for long-term cold storage; it does not preserve editable version history and retrieval is slow and carries additional costs.
• D (Copy to EFS) introduces a separate storage service with higher per-GB cost and added operational complexity - far from cost-effective for this use case.

Memory tip: Think of S3 Versioning as a built-in "undo button" - any time a file is changed or deleted, S3 keeps the old copy quietly in the background until you need it.

No community discussion yet for this question.