A company has a web application that includes an embedded NoSQL database. The application runs on Amazon EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB). The instances run in an Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling group in a single Availability Zone.
A recent increase in traffic requires the application to be highly available and for the database to be eventually consistent.
Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
The goal is to ensure high availability for the application and database with the least operational overhead. Modifying the Auto Scaling group to use instances across three Availability Zones distributes the load and ensures application availability even if one zone fails. Migrating the embedded NoSQL database to Amazon DynamoDB provides a managed solution that is highly available and eventually consistent, eliminating the operational overhead of managing and replicating the database across EC2 instances. DynamoDB's managed nature and built-in high availability features align well with the requirement to keep operational overhead low.
The correct option should be D
ASG for application HA + DynamoDB Scale for HA
Dynamo DB presents more advantages, because it would need less administrative effort
DynamoDB + Modifying the Auto Scaling group
But wouldn't migrating an embedded database to a new one introduce operational overhead now and in the future?
B as it's highly available and has less operational overhead than D.
ALB -> NLB makes no sense and solution lacks HA for the app layer.
Option D: let focus on HA + Scaling
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
I honestly don't think you can use db Migration service to migrate an embedding db.