Migrating Kubernetes Workloads and NFS Storage to AWS
A company has on-premises data centers that run an image processing service. The service consists of containerized applications that run on Kubernetes clusters. All the applications have access to the same NFS share for files and data storage. The company is running out of NFS capacity in the data centers and needs to migrate to AWS as soon as possible. The Kubernetes clusters must be highly available on AWS. Which combination of actions will meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer BE. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
This question tests your ability to map on-premises infrastructure components to their AWS equivalents, with the common trap being the selection of EBS due to its familiarity as primary AWS storage.
Migrating stateful Kubernetes workloads and shared file storage from on-premises environments to AWS requires selecting managed services that support multi-node access and high availability. The developer community consistently confirms that pairing Amazon EFS for shared storage with Amazon EKS for orchestration, alongside Amazon ECR for container images, is the architecturally correct solution.
Candidates frequently select options involving Amazon EBS because they overlook its fundamental limitation: EBS is block-level storage designed for single-instance attachment, making it incapable of providing the concurrent multi-node access required by distributed Kubernetes pods.
Community Discussion (5 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Amazon EKS delivers a fully managed, highly available Kubernetes control plane that seamlessly replaces on-premises cluster management overhead. Amazon EFS functions as a fully managed NFS-compatible file system that natively supports concurrent read/write operations across multiple EC2 instances and Availability Zones, perfectly replicating the existing shared storage architecture. Uploading container images to Amazon ECR ensures secure, centralized image registry management that integrates directly with EKS node groups. Together, these three services provide a drop-in replacement that satisfies all stated architectural requirements.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Amazon EBS (Options A, C, and D) provides block storage that can only be attached to a single EC2 instance at a time, fundamentally breaking the shared storage model required by the containerized workload. Option C incorrectly proposes Amazon ECS, which contradicts the explicit requirement to maintain Kubernetes clusters. Even with advanced configurations, EBS lacks the seamless, cloud-native multi-attach capabilities that EFS provides out-of-the-box for distributed container orchestration. Selecting EBS would force the implementation of complex third-party clustering solutions, defeating the purpose of a rapid AWS migration.Community Comment Notes
The voting community overwhelmingly selects BE, highlighting EFS as the definitive replacement for traditional NFS shares. Comment [1] accurately points to AWS documentation confirming EFS's compatibility with on-premises NFS workloads and reinforces the necessity of EKS. Comments [3] and [4] emphasize that EFS's inherent multi-node mounting capability is the deciding factor over block storage alternatives. This consensus demonstrates that recognizing strict service boundaries is essential for passing the Developer Associate exam.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
Always map legacy infrastructure components directly to their AWS managed equivalents before considering custom implementations. Remember that Kubernetes workloads inherently require multi-node shared storage, making EFS the standard choice over single-instance EBS volumes.
Related Analysis
Practice All DVA-C02 Questions
Access 100 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full DVA-C02 Practice Test →