Exam SAA-C03 All QuestionsBrowse all questions from this exam
Go to Exam
Question 64

A company has more than 5 TB of file data on Windows file servers that run on premises. Users and applications interact with the data each day.

The company is moving its Windows workloads to AWS. As the company continues this process, the company requires access to AWS and on-premises file storage with minimum latency. The company needs a solution that minimizes operational overhead and requires no significant changes to the existing file access patterns. The company uses an AWS Site-to-Site VPN connection for connectivity to AWS.

What should a solutions architect do to meet these requirements?

    Correct Answer: D

    The company needs a solution providing low-latency access to both AWS and on-premises file storage with minimal operational overhead and without significant changes to the existing file access patterns. Deploying Amazon FSx for Windows File Server on AWS combined with an Amazon FSx File Gateway on premises best meets this requirement. The FSx File Gateway will provide local caching, reducing latency for on-premises access by keeping frequently accessed files close to the users, while the primary storage resides on FSx for Windows File Server in AWS. This solution does not require significant changes as the FSx File Gateway integrates with the on-premises environment, presenting a compatible file share to users and applications.

Discussion
sba21Option: D

https://www.examtopics.com/discussions/amazon/view/83281-exam-aws-certified-solutions-architect-associate-saa-c02/

MutiverseAgent

Agree answer is D) --- Requirements are: - "Users and applications interact with the data each day" - "the company requires access to AWS and on-premises file storage with minimum latency" --- Explanation: Answer A) will work with the same on-prem <> aws latency as in answer D) as both use the VPN Connection. Having said this, by using an Amazon FSx File Gateway on premise as the D) scenario mentioned, all users will have a great benefit on using the cache that the FSx File Gateway has on their daily workloads. And that is part of the requierements: "users", "each day", "latency"

MrAWS

D IS WRONG - Its used for caching. you cannot 'Move the on-premises file data to the FSx File Gateway.' which is stated in answer D. It pretty sure AWS employee's are spamming this site with the wrong answers intentionally.

DarthVaper

What's the problem with it being a cache? They did say "the company requires access to AWS and on-premises file storage with minimum latency." Not discarding what you said but what's wrong here?

chagantik90

you don't move data to gateway, its cached when people use those files from Fsx server

dsshahu01

The problem with cache is - It needs to refreshed, which is an overkill for a migration project The cache refresh requires another solution since the users/applications interact with it daily which means it does modify often.

Rabbit117

I think D is correct. The FSx File gateway will look like any other Windows file share to the on-prem clients so when they write, or "Copy" data to the share it will be be cached locally and also written to the FSx service in the cloud. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/filegateway/latest/filefsxw/file-gateway-fsx-concepts.html

TheFivePips

I kinda hate this question. A) seems like the least operational overhead and the simplest to do, but doesnt really meet the low latenecy goal D) provides some of the benefits of caching for low latency for on-prem, but the way its worded doesnt really make sense. You dont move data to a gateway, and it would be more complicated to set up. Do you go with an answer that doesnt meet all the criteria, or with the answer that doesnt make a lot of sense. Fuck if I know

ManikRoy

Exactly my thoughts

Rabbit117

The gateway is the connection point to the file share in the cloud. The on-prem client will see a share presented from the gateway appliance, as far as the client is concerned its a local file share, however it has a corresponding share on the FSx service in the cloud.By writing, coping or "moving" the data to a file share presented via the File gateway the data will be written to the FSx service in the cloud. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/filegateway/latest/filefsxw/file-gateway-fsx-concepts.html

ManikRoyOption: D

Will go with option D as option A is missing the Fsx File gateway component deployed on-premise which will provide the low latency access.

3680113

Option D is Correct, D provides low latency options for both of premium and the cloud loads.

3680113

*on-prem*

awsgeek75Option: D

Windows File Servers + Preserve compatibility so BC is wrong due to S3 A does not provide on-premise access and suggest to move the files which is wrong as company wants to keep on-prem access D meets all the requirements.

Abhi2024

I would go with option A as question mentions "solution that minimizes operational overhead" . Adding FSx File Gateway would add more complexity. They already have Site to Site VPN. This way min change required.

LIORAGEOption: D

D: FSX File gateway is nessary for communication between on-premise and aws FSX for window

SaurabhTiwari1Option: A

Option A is correct because - minimum latency -minimum operational overhead -requires no significant changes to the existing file access patterns Option D is incorrect - -Amazon FSx File Gateway on premises, which would add additional complexity and potential latency, , as the data would need to be transferred between the on-premises gateway and AWS. These options would also require reconfiguring the workloads to use the gateways, which could involve significant changes to the existing file access patterns. -unnecessary complexity and potential latency

pentium75

A does not include any on-premises component, how would it meet the "access to ... on-premises file storage with minimum latency" requirement?

hieunt.husOption: A

A. Deploy and configure Amazon FSx for Windows File Server on AWS. Move the on-premises file data to FSx for Windows File Server. Reconfigure the workloads to use FSx for Windows File Server on AWS.

jatricOption: D

keyword as company continue to migrate workload from om-prem to cloud

stormbreaker7Option: A

min. operational overhead.

UzbekistanOption: A

Option D suggests deploying both Amazon FSx for Windows File Server on AWS and an Amazon FSx File Gateway on premises. While this option may provide a solution for accessing on-premises file data in AWS, it introduces additional complexity and potential overhead that may not be necessary given the company's existing AWS Site-to-Site VPN connectivity. Here are some reasons why Option D may not be the most suitable choice: Complexity, Cost, Redundancy and Operational Overhead.

Rabbit117

A VPN or DX connection is required for FSx File gateway. Option D provides low mantiance as FSx for Windows is a managed service and the file gateway will provide the low latency access required by the on-prem services.

3680113

Both Amazon FSx file gateway on-prem and Amazon FSx for windows file server goes hand in hand. So there is no way you can use the file gateway on-Prem and not use the Fsx for windows file server. Your conclusion of adding more overhead does not hold. Hence D is the perfect answer. Configure the cloud workloads to use FSx for Windows File Server on AWS. Configure the on-premises workloads to use the FSx File Gateway.

ROBERTXLIONOption: A

To meet the company's requirements of accessing both AWS and on-premises file storage with minimum latency, while minimizing operational overhead and maintaining existing file access patterns, a solutions architect should choose Option A: Deploy and configure Amazon FSx for Windows File Server on AWS. This option allows for the deployment of FSx for Windows File Server on AWS, facilitating the migration of on-premises file data to FSx. By reconfiguring the workloads to use FSx for Windows File Server on AWS, the company can ensure seamless access to the file data while leveraging the benefits of AWS infrastructure. This solution aligns with the company's objective of moving Windows workloads to AWS and utilizes the existing AWS Site-to-Site VPN connection for connectivity.

ignajtpolandstrongOption: D

Amazon FSx File Gateway is a service that provides low latency and efficient access to Amazon FSx for Windows File Server shares from on-premises facilities. It helps eliminate on-premises file servers and consolidates all the data into AWS to take advantage of the scale and economics of cloud storage

pentium75Option: D

A does not include any on-premises component, thus it can't meet the "access to ... on-premises file storage with minimum latency" requirement. B and C use S3 which cannot be directly accessed by the Windows servers they are going to move to AWS.

chagantik90Option: A

Moving data to Gateway doesn't makes sense and splitting cloud workload and onprem workload doesn't make sense in D. So closest is A and i know A doesn't really cover about latency but A looks the best option here

pentium75

A does not include any on-premises component, how would it meet the "access to ... on-premises file storage with minimum latency" requirement? With D you can access the data with minimum latency on premises (from the gateway) and in AWS (from FSx).

MiniYangOption: A

Amazon FSx for Windows File Server provides the feel of a native Windows file server while providing low-latency access on AWS. This allows your local users and applications to seamlessly access file systems in AWS without requiring significant changes to their access. Although D also mentions Amazon FSx for Windows File Server, it also includes Amazon FSx File Gateway, which may introduce additional complexity. So, for the need to minimize latency without making major changes while minimizing operational overhead, A looks to fit those criteria better. The company uses an AWS site-to-site VPN connection and may prefer option A over D due to some added latency that the VPN may cause, as well as possible bandwidth limitations.

pentium75

Yes, FSx provides "low-latency access on AWS", but we also need "access to ... on-premises file storage with minimum latency". A does not include any on-premises component.