SAP-C02 Practice Question: Accelerate Workload Migration and Modernization
A company is migrating a legacy Java application from an on-premises VMware environment to AWS. The application runs on a single server with 16 vCPUs and 32 GB RAM, and uses an NFS share for shared files. The company wants to minimize changes and reduce operational overhead. Which migration strategy best meets these requirements?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is assuming that any AWS storage service can replace an NFS share, but only Amazon EFS provides the required NFS protocol compatibility for a lift-and-shift migration.
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
✓
Rehost the application to Amazon EC2 by using AWS Application Migration Service, and replace the NFS share with Amazon EFS.
Rehosting with AWS Application Migration Service allows the server to be migrated to EC2 with minimal modifications, aligning with the lift-and-shift approach. Amazon EFS offers a managed NFS-compatible file system that can replace the on-premises NFS share without application changes, reducing operational overhead. Other strategies involve refactoring or replatforming, which introduce unnecessary changes.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Rehost the application to Amazon EC2 by using AWS Application Migration Service, and replace the NFS share with Amazon EFS.
Why this is correct
Rehosting with AWS Application Migration Service lifts and shifts the server to EC2 with minimal changes, and replacing the NFS share with Amazon EFS provides a managed, scalable file system that integrates with EC2. This reduces operational overhead while preserving the application architecture.
- ✗
Refactor the application into microservices running on Amazon ECS with AWS Fargate, and use Amazon S3 for shared file storage.
Why it's wrong here
Refactoring into microservices requires significant code changes and redesign, which contradicts the goal of minimizing changes. Amazon S3 is object storage and not a drop-in replacement for an NFS share, so the application would likely require modifications to its file access patterns.
- ✗
Retain the application on-premises and extend the network to AWS using AWS Direct Connect.
Why it's wrong here
Retaining the application on-premises does not achieve migration to AWS and does not reduce operational overhead. While Direct Connect provides connectivity, it does not address the goal of moving the workload to AWS and modernizing its storage.
- ✗
Replatform the application to AWS Elastic Beanstalk, and use Amazon RDS for shared file storage.
Why it's wrong here
Elastic Beanstalk is a PaaS offering that may require application adjustments, and Amazon RDS is a relational database service, not a file storage solution. Using RDS for shared files is technically invalid and would not meet the application's NFS requirements.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This SAP-C02 question is part of Courseiva's 984-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam 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.