SAP-C02 Design for New Solutions Practice Question
A company is deploying a containerized web application on Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS). The application requires persistent storage that must be shared across multiple pods running on different nodes. The storage must support ReadWriteMany (RWX) access mode and provide high throughput for media processing workloads. The company wants to minimize operational overhead and use AWS managed services. Which two solutions should a solutions architect recommend? (Choose two.)
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is assuming that Amazon EBS or Amazon S3 can satisfy a ReadWriteMany requirement, but EBS is limited to single-node attachment and S3 is not a POSIX file system.
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
✓
Use Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) with the EFS CSI driver to provide a shared file system for the pods.
Amazon EFS and Amazon FSx for Lustre both support the ReadWriteMany access mode and are managed AWS services that integrate with Amazon EKS via CSI drivers. EFS provides scalable, elastic storage suitable for general-purpose shared file systems, while FSx for Lustre delivers high throughput and low latency for compute-intensive media processing. Together, they offer the required shared storage with minimal operational overhead.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Use Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) with the EFS CSI driver to provide a shared file system for the pods.
Why this is correct
Amazon EFS supports the ReadWriteMany access mode, allowing multiple pods across different nodes to mount and write to the same file system concurrently. The EFS CSI driver integrates with Amazon EKS to dynamically provision persistent volumes. EFS is a fully managed, scalable file system that requires minimal operational overhead and can deliver high throughput for media processing, making it an ideal choice for this scenario.
- ✓
Use Amazon FSx for Lustre with the FSx CSI driver to provide a high-performance shared file system.
Why this is correct
Amazon FSx for Lustre is a high-performance file system designed for compute-intensive workloads such as media processing. It supports the ReadWriteMany access mode and can be mounted by multiple pods across different nodes. The FSx CSI driver enables dynamic provisioning for Amazon EKS. FSx for Lustre is a managed service, reducing operational overhead, and provides high throughput and low latency, making it well-suited for this use case.
- ✗
Use Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) with the EBS CSI driver to provide persistent volumes for the pods.
Why it's wrong here
Amazon EBS volumes can only be attached to a single EC2 instance at a time and do not support the ReadWriteMany access mode. While the EBS CSI driver can provision persistent volumes for EKS, it is limited to ReadWriteOnce or ReadOnlyMany access modes. For a shared file system across multiple pods on different nodes, EBS is not suitable and would not meet the requirement.
- ✗
Use Amazon S3 with the Mountpoint for Amazon S3 CSI driver to provide a shared file system.
Why it's wrong here
Mountpoint for Amazon S3 CSI driver allows pods to access S3 buckets as a file system, but it is not a POSIX-compliant file system and does not support ReadWriteMany access mode in the traditional sense. It is optimized for read-heavy workloads and does not provide the high throughput and low latency needed for media processing. While it reduces operational overhead, it does not meet the performance and access mode requirements.
- ✗
Use AWS Storage Gateway in file gateway mode to provide an NFS mount for the pods.
Why it's wrong here
AWS Storage Gateway file gateway provides an NFS or SMB interface to Amazon S3, but it is designed for on-premises or hybrid use cases, not for native integration with Amazon EKS pods. It adds operational overhead because you must manage the gateway appliance, and it does not provide the high throughput and low latency required for media processing. Additionally, it does not integrate with the Kubernetes CSI driver for dynamic provisioning.
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
Courseiva writes every SAP-C02 question from scratch — 984 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. 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 SAP-C02 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 SAP-C02 exam.