Exam AWS Certified Solutions Architect - Associate SAA-C03 topic 1 question 502 discussion

By combining the use of Amazon EFS for shared file storage and Amazon CloudFront for content delivery, you can achieve improved performance and resilience for the website.

First of all you should understand, a website using CMS is a dynamic one not static, so A is out, B is more complicated than C, so C, and between global accelerator and cloudfront, Cloudfront suits better as there is no legacy protocols data(UDP, etc) that needs to be accessed, hence E

I choose AE. Although I don't know if s3 can be mounted on ec2 ?? Maybe wrong wording. Efs is a better choice but its not a natural selection for strong images.

Not A because you can't mount an S3 bucket on an EC2 instance. You could use a file gateway and share an S3 bucket via NFS and mount that on EC2, but that is not mentioned here and would also not make sense.

You can mount EFS file systems to multiple Amazon EC2 instances remotely and securely without having to log in to the instances by using the AWS Systems Manager Run Command.

A is out of the game for sure. Mount S3 to EC2 ... madness. The question is CE or DE, but it is CE because of AWS Global Accelerator is match with NLB, not ALB as it is staded in option D, thus CE as many of all here noted.

A and E is correct. We have a cloud fromt + S3 combo

A and E. C is not correct because You dont mount a new EFS onto existing EC2. If you do that, you have to migrate all exising data in EBS into EFS. Then remove all the EBS. Should never do this.

https://bluexp.netapp.com/blog/ebs-efs-amazons3-best-cloud-storage-system

Not A - S3 cannot be mounted (up until few months ago). Exam does not test for the updates in last 6 months.

You have summarized the reasons why options A and E are the best choices very well. Migrating static website assets like images to Amazon S3 enables high scalability, durability and shared access across instances. This improves performance. Using Auto Scaling with load balancing provides elasticity and resilience. Adding a CloudFront distribution further boosts performance through caching and content delivery.

Both options AE and CE would work, but I choose AE, because, on my opinion, S3 is best suited for performance and resilience.

EFS, unlike EBS, can be mounted across multiple EC2 instances and hence C over A.

Technically both options AE and CE would work. But S3 is best suited for unstructured data, and the key benefit of mounting S3 on EC2 is that it provides a cost-effective alternative of using object storage for applications dealing with large files, as compared to expensive file or block storage. At the same time it provides more performant, scalable and highly available storage for these applications. Even though there is no mention of 'cost efficient' in this question, in the real world cost is the no.1 factor. In the exam I believe both options would be a pass. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/storage/mounting-amazon-s3-to-an-amazon-ec2-instance-using-a-private-connection-to-s3-file-gateway/

Option C provides moving the website images onto an Amazon EFS file system that is mounted on every EC2 instance. Amazon EFS provides a scalable and fully managed file storage solution that can be accessed concurrently from multiple EC2 instances. This ensures that the website images can be accessed efficiently and consistently by all instances, improving performance In Option E The Auto Scaling group maintains a minimum of two instances, ensuring resilience by automatically replacing any unhealthy instances. Additionally, configuring an Amazon CloudFront distribution for the website further improves performance by caching content at edge locations closer to the end-users, reducing latency and improving content delivery. Hence combining these actions, the website's performance is improved through efficient image storage and content delivery

Which answe is correct?the most voted ones or the Suggested answers?

A and E: S3 is perfect for images. Besides is the perfect partner of cloudfront