Q: 9
A gaming company hosts a browser-based application on AWS. The users of the application consume
a large number of videos and images that are stored in Amazon S3. This content is the same for all
users.
The application has increased in popularity, and millions of users worldwide are accessing these
media files. The company wants to provide the files to the users while reducing the load on the
origin.
Which solution meets these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Options
Discussion
B
Totally B here. CloudFront is meant to cache S3 content at edge locations, so it cuts down on origin requests and saves money. ElastiCache and Global Accelerator don't help with global static content caching like this. Think this is the most AWS-ish solution, but let me know if you see it differently.
Its B, Global Accelerator (A) might trip people up but it doesn't cache S3 content.
B tbh
If the files change often or need quick cache invalidation, would ElastiCache (C/D) actually be better than CloudFront (B) for this global setup?
I think this is same as a common exam questions. on practice, pick is B
Had something like this in a mock. Not A, B is it.
I was thinking C could be useful too since ElastiCache handles caching but that's more for dynamic data or database results, not S3 media files. Pretty sure you'd want something more CDN-focused for static content, but open to other ideas.
Wouldn't C handle cache for media at scale too if it's set in front of web servers?
B vs A, pretty sure B is right based on exam reports for global S3 content.
Be respectful. No spam.
