SAP-C02 Practice Question: Accelerate Workload Migration and Modernization
A company is migrating a monolithic application to AWS and wants to modernize it into microservices. The application currently uses a single relational database. Which migration strategy is most appropriate to minimize risk while starting the modernization process?
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
✓
Incremental migration using the Strangler Fig pattern
The Strangler Fig pattern (Option A) is the most appropriate strategy because it allows incremental replacement of monolithic components with microservices, reducing the risk associated with a full rewrite or big bang migration. Option B (big bang migration to containers) is risky as it requires simultaneous migration of all components. Option C (replatform to Amazon RDS) only changes the database platform without addressing application architecture. Option D (rehost using VM Import/Export) simply lifts and shifts the monolith without modernization.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Incremental migration using the Strangler Fig pattern
Why this is correct
The Strangler Fig pattern incrementally extracts functionality from the monolith behind a facade, routing traffic to new microservices while the legacy application keeps running. This limits blast radius and lets the team modernise gradually without a risky big-bang rewrite.
- ✗
Big bang migration of the entire application to containers
Why it's wrong here
A big bang migration moves the entire application at once, so any failure affects the whole system and rollback is difficult, which contradicts minimising risk. It is tempting because containers support microservices, but it would be correct only when downtime is acceptable and the application is already container-ready.
- ✗
Replatform to Amazon RDS for MySQL
Why it's wrong here
Replatforming to Amazon RDS for MySQL retains the single relational database and monolithic data model, so it does not begin decomposing the application into microservices. It is tempting because RDS reduces operational overhead, but it would be correct when the goal is managed database hosting without architectural change.
- ✗
Rehost the application using AWS VM Import/Export
Why it's wrong here
VM Import/Export lifts the server image onto EC2 unchanged, so the monolith and its single relational database persist exactly as before, delivering no decomposition path. It is tempting because rehosting is the fastest low-risk first hop, and it would be right when the goal is purely to exit a data centre with minimal change.
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.