SAP-C02 Practice Question: Accelerate Workload Migration and Modernization
A company is migrating a legacy Windows application to AWS. The application requires a shared file system accessible from multiple EC2 instances. Which AWS storage solution should the company use?
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 Windows File Server
Amazon FSx for Windows File Server provides a fully managed native Windows file system that supports the SMB protocol, which is required for legacy Windows applications to access shared file systems. Amazon EFS uses NFS, which is not natively supported by Windows. EBS with multi-attach is limited to a small number of instances and not ideal for file sharing. S3 is object storage and does not provide a traditional file system interface.
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 Elastic File System (EFS)
Why it's wrong here
EFS provides a shared NFS file system for Linux workloads, and its POSIX permissions and NFS protocol do not natively support Windows SMB access or NTFS semantics. It would be correct for Linux EC2 instances needing a shared, scalable file system across Availability Zones.
- ✓
Amazon FSx for Windows File Server
Why this is correct
Amazon FSx for Windows File Server provides fully managed SMB shares backed by Windows file servers, supporting NTFS permissions and Active Directory integration. Multiple EC2 instances can mount the same share concurrently, meeting the legacy Windows application's shared-file-system requirement.
- ✗
Amazon Elastic Block Store (EBS) with multi-attach enabled
Why it's wrong here
EBS multi-attach permits a single volume to attach to multiple Nitro instances in one Availability Zone, but it requires a cluster-aware file system and does not provide SMB sharing for Windows. It would be correct for clustered applications needing concurrent block access.
- ✗
Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3)
Why it's wrong here
S3 is object storage accessed via HTTP APIs, not a mounted file system, so the application cannot use standard Windows file I/O paths or locking. It would be correct for storing and retrieving objects such as backups, media or static content at scale.
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
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 by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
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.