AWS Service for Cost-Effective SQL Server Migration
A company uses an on-premises Microsoft SQL Server database to store financial transaction data. The company migrates the transaction data from the on-premises database to AWS at the end of each month. The company has noticed that the cost to migrate data from the on-premises database to an Amazon RDS for SQL Server database has increased recently. The company requires a cost-effective solution to migrate the data to AWS. The solution must cause minimal downtown for the applications that access the database. Which AWS service should the company use to meet these requirements?
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer B. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
The core concept is choosing a managed migration service over generic transfer tools when database-specific replication and schema handling are required.
This question evaluates the selection of AWS Database Migration Service (DMS) for migrating on-premises Microsoft SQL Server data to Amazon RDS with minimal downtime.
Candidates often select AWS DataSync, assuming it handles all data movement; however, DataSync lacks the database-level transactional consistency and CDC capabilities needed for live or near-live DB migrations.
Community Discussion (7 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
AWS Database Migration Service (DMS) is purpose-built for moving data between heterogeneous or homogeneous databases with minimal downtime. It supports continuous data replication using Change Data Capture (CDC), which allows the source database to remain available during the migration process, directly addressing the "minimal downtime" requirement. For monthly migrations, DMS can be configured as a one-time load or continuous sync, making it cost-effective compared to maintaining complex custom scripts.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
AWS Lambda (A) requires custom code to handle database connections and transformation logic, increasing development overhead and risk. AWS Direct Connect (C) provides network connectivity but does not migrate data itself; it merely connects the on-premises environment to AWS VPC. AWS DataSync (D) is designed for file-based transfers (SMB/NFS) and object storage, lacking the ability to understand database schemas, transactions, or perform online schema changes required for SQL Server.Community Comment Notes
The community overwhelmingly supports Option B, recognizing DMS as the standard tool for database migrations. One user noted the typo "downtown" instead of "downtime," highlighting the importance of reading closely. Another user pointed out that while Snowball/DataSync might work for bulk backups, they do not offer the seamless, low-downtime experience DMS provides for active database access.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
Always look for keywords like 'database', 'migration', and 'minimal downtime'. If the scenario involves moving structured data between databases, DMS is almost always the correct choice over general-purpose networking or storage services.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why not use AWS DataSync for database migration?
DataSync moves files and objects, not database transactions. It cannot maintain referential integrity or provide the continuous replication needed for minimal downtime.
Is DMS expensive for monthly migrations?
No, DMS is pay-as-you-go. You only pay for the replication instance duration, making it cost-effective for infrequent or scheduled migrations compared to building custom ETL pipelines.
Related Analysis
Practice All DEA-C01 Questions
Access 100 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full DEA-C01 Practice Test →