A media company is evaluating the possibility of moving its systems to the AWS Cloud. The company needs at least 10 TB of storage with the maximum possible I/O performance for video processing, 300 TB of very durable storage for storing media content, and 900 TB of storage to meet requirements for archival media that is not in use anymore.
Which set of services should a solutions architect recommend to meet these requirements?
For the company's requirements, combining different Amazon services is the best approach to meet each specific need. Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) provides high-performance block storage, which is essential for the 10 TB of storage that requires maximum possible I/O performance for video processing. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) offers very durable, scalable, and secure object storage, making it ideal for the 300 TB of storage needed for storing media content. Lastly, Amazon S3 Glacier is a secure, durable, and low-cost storage service for data archiving, which perfectly suits the 900 TB required for archival media that is not in active use. This combination ensures that each storage need is met efficiently and effectively.
Max instance store possible at this time is 30TB for NVMe which has the higher I/O compared to EBS. is4gen.8xlarge 4 x 7,500 GB (30 TB) NVMe SSD https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/InstanceStorage.html#instance-store-volumes
instance store volume for the root volume, the size of this volume varies by AMI, but the maximum size is 10 GB
This link shows a max capacity of 30TB, so what is the problem? https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/InstanceStorage.html#instance-store-volumes
Only the following instance types support an instance store volume as the root device: C3, D2, G2, I2, M3, and R3, and we're using an I3, so an instance store volume is irrelevant.
THE CORRECT ANSWER IS A. The biggest Instance Store Storage Optimized option (is4gen.8xlarge) has a capacity of only 3TB. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/instance-store-volumes.html#instance-store-vol-so
Update: i3en.metal and i3en.24xlarge = 8 x 7500 GB (60TB)
The correct Answer is A : Amazon EC2 instance store (Instance Store) is usually not the best choice because the storage it provides is temporary and tied to the life cycle of the instance. When an instance is stopped or terminated, data on the instance store is lost. In this scenario, the company's requirements were to have the maximum possible I/O performance and required durable data storage. Therefore, using Amazon EC2 Instance Store does not meet these requirements because it lacks durability. In contrast, Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) provides persistent regional block storage and can meet the needs of high-performance I/O. Therefore, the answer should include Amazon EBS, not Amazon EC2 instance storage.
"The company's requirements were to have the maximum possible I/O performance and required durable data storage." Yeah, but not for the same data. 10 TB "maximum possible I/O performance" for processing (= temporary) 300 TB "very durable" (= S3) 900 TB "for archival" (= Glacier)
pentium75 is right.
The best option for the given requirements would be: A. Amazon EBS for maximum performance, Amazon S3 for durable data storage, and Amazon S3 Glacier for archival storage. Explanation: Amazon EBS for maximum performance: Amazon Elastic Block Store (EBS) provides high-performance block storage volumes for use with Amazon EC2 instances. This is suitable for the 10 TB of storage with maximum possible I/O performance required for video processing. Amazon S3 for durable data storage: Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3) is highly durable, scalable, and secure object storage. It's suitable for the 300 TB of very durable storage needed for storing media content. Amazon S3 Glacier for archival storage: Amazon S3 Glacier provides secure, durable, and low-cost storage for data archiving and long-term backup. It's ideal for the 900 TB of storage required for archival media that is not in use anymore.
D - I chose A. But its a trick question. Upon reading Pentium75's Comment, I agree it should be D. However, I would feel more confident if it mentioned "temporary 10Gb" in the question...
"D" is dependant on instance type of hpc6id.32xlarge is 16TB for accelerated computing with NVMe SSD. I will go for "A" because it does not depend on EC2 instance as a requirement.
A is right
The keyword here is "maximum possible I/O performance". EBS and Ec2 instance store are good options, but EC2 is higher than EBS in terms of I/O performance. Maximum possible is clearly Ec2 instance storage. There are some concerns about the 10TB needed, however, storage optimized Ec2 instance stores can take up to 24 x 13980 GB (ie 312 TB) So option D is the winner here.
Correct Answer: A. Amazon EBS for maximum performance, Amazon S3 for durable data storage, and Amazon S3 Glacier for archival storage Explanation: Amazon EBS for maximum performance: Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) provides high-performance block storage for use with Amazon EC2. It is well-suited for workloads requiring high I/O performance, such as video processing. Amazon S3 for durable data storage: Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) offers highly durable and scalable object storage. It is ideal for storing large amounts of media content with high durability. Amazon S3 Glacier for archival storage: Amazon S3 Glacier is a low-cost storage service for data archiving and long-term backup. It is perfect for storing archival media that is not frequently accessed but needs to be preserved.
the correct answer is A, max 10TB storage need per instance (not instances)
A for sure
Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store): Provides high I/O performance suitable for video processing tasks. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service): Offers very durable and scalable storage, ideal for storing large amounts of media content. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System): While it provides scalable and durable storage, it is optimized for file-based workloads rather than object storage, which is less suitable for large-scale media storage
the answer is D From a maximum I/O perspective, Amazon EBS is significantly better than Amazon EC2 instance store for two main reasons: 1. Underlying Storage Technology: Amazon EBS: Utilizes Solid State Drives (SSDs) and NVMe storage options, offering high-performance IOPS (Input/Output Operations Per Second) and throughput. Amazon EC2 Instance Store: Relies on the local hard disk drives (HDDs) attached to the EC2 instance, which have significantly lower IOPS and throughput compared to SSDs.
Instance store is more than 10T
A sounds good but D is better as the store is physically attached to the instance!
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/InstanceStorage.html
A looks right.
vote for D since the demand is asking for maximum I/O while did not specify how durable the performance should be. So D. otherwise more realistic and durable option is A with high I/O performance as well
well! read option D again, it says EC2 Instance, not EC2 Instances! so the answer is obviously A.
Huh? "Instance store" is the name of the service, and it's what provides "maximum I/O performance possible", WAY above what EBS can.