Option B looks right to me. DataSync on Hyper-V makes sense since they have that environment already, so no need for extra EC2 costs. S3 Glacier Deep Archive is the cheapest for long-term storage, and retrieval time easily fits in the 1 week window. Throttling and scheduling are built into DataSync too. Not totally sure between B and C, but C feels more expensive with S3 Standard involved at first. Anyone disagree?
Q: 3
A company has an application that analyzes and stores image data on premises The application
receives millions of new image files every day Files are an average of 1 MB in size The files are
analyzed in batches of 1 GB When the application analyzes a batch the application zips the
imagestogether The application then archives the images as a single file in an on-premises NFS
server for long-term storage
The company has a Microsoft Hyper-V environment on premises and has compute capacity available
The company does not have storage capacity and wants to archive the images on AWS The company
needs the ability to retrieve archived data within t week of a request.
The company has a 10 Gbps AWS Direct Connect connection between its on-premises data center
and AWS. The company needs to set bandwidth limits and schedule archived images to be copied to
AWS dunng non-business hours.
Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Options
Discussion
Its C, not B. S3 Standard first then Glacier Deep Archive is less of a hassle to restore batches, I think.
Be respectful. No spam.
Question 3 of 35