SAA-C03 Design High-Performing Architectures Practice Question
A solutions architect is designing a high-performance computing (HPC) workload on AWS that requires a shared POSIX-compliant file system with high throughput and low latency for thousands of concurrent compute instances. The workload is temporary, running for a few hours each week, and the team wants to minimize cost. Which storage solution should the architect recommend?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is assuming that Amazon EFS with Provisioned Throughput can match the performance of FSx for Lustre for HPC, when Lustre is specifically optimized for high-throughput, low-latency parallel file access.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Amazon FSx for Lustre with a scratch file system, linked to an Amazon S3 bucket for data import and export.
FSx for Lustre is purpose-built for HPC, offering a POSIX-compliant, high-throughput, low-latency file system. A scratch deployment is cost-effective for temporary workloads and can be linked to S3 for data staging. EFS, S3 with FUSE, and FSx for Windows File Server do not provide the required performance or protocol compatibility for this scenario.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Amazon FSx for Windows File Server with Multi-AZ deployment and SSD storage, shared across all compute instances.
Why it's wrong here
FSx for Windows File Server provides SMB protocol access, not POSIX, and is optimized for Windows workloads. It does not support the Linux-based HPC applications that require POSIX compliance. Multi-AZ adds cost and is unnecessary for temporary workloads. This solution would not meet the protocol or performance requirements.
- ✗
Amazon S3 with S3 Transfer Acceleration and a custom FUSE client mounted on each compute instance to provide POSIX access.
Why it's wrong here
S3 is object storage, not a POSIX file system, and FUSE clients add latency and are not suitable for high-performance concurrent access patterns. Transfer Acceleration speeds up uploads over long distances but does not provide the low-latency, high-throughput shared file system needed for HPC. This approach would bottleneck the workload.
- ✗
Amazon EFS with Provisioned Throughput and mount targets in multiple Availability Zones, mounted on all compute instances.
Why it's wrong here
EFS is POSIX-compliant and scalable, but it is not optimized for the extreme throughput and low latency required by HPC workloads with thousands of concurrent instances. Provisioned Throughput increases cost and still may not match Lustre's performance. EFS is better suited for general-purpose file sharing and content management, not tightly coupled HPC.
- ✓
Amazon FSx for Lustre with a scratch file system, linked to an Amazon S3 bucket for data import and export.
Why this is correct
FSx for Lustre is designed for HPC workloads, providing a POSIX-compliant file system with sub-millisecond latencies and hundreds of GB/s throughput. A scratch file system is cost-effective for temporary workloads and does not replicate data, which suits the few-hours-per-week pattern. Linking to S3 allows seamless data import and export, reducing manual data movement.
Quick reference
AWS S3 Storage Class Comparison
| Storage Class | Min Duration | Retrieval | Use Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| S3 Standard | None | Immediate | Frequently accessed data |
| S3 Standard-IA | 30 days | Immediate | Infrequent access, rapid retrieval |
| S3 One Zone-IA | 30 days | Immediate | Non-critical infrequent data |
| S3 Intelligent-Tiering | None | Immediate–hours | Unknown or changing access patterns |
| S3 Glacier Instant | 90 days | Milliseconds | Archive with instant retrieval |
| S3 Glacier Flexible | 90 days | Minutes–hours | Archive, flexible retrieval |
| S3 Glacier Deep Archive | 180 days | Hours | Long-term compliance archive |
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 935 original SAA-C03 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official Amazon Web Services exam blueprint
This SAA-C03 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Amazon Web Services certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the SAA-C03 exam.