How to Deploy Containerized Applications on AWS with Least Operational Effort?
A company is preparing to migrate an application to the company's first AWS environment. Before this migration, a developer is creating a proof-of-concept application to validate a model for building and deploying container-based applications on AWS. Which combination of steps should the developer take to deploy the containerized proof-of-concept application with the LEAST operational effort? (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 the ability to choose the simplest container deployment path on AWS, where ECS + Fargate eliminates cluster management compared to EKS.
To deploy a containerized proof-of-concept application with the least operational effort on AWS, developers should package the image using Docker CLI, push it to Amazon ECR, and deploy it using Amazon ECS on AWS Fargate. Community consensus strongly favors ECS over EKS for minimal operational overhead.
Many candidates choose EKS on Fargate (option D) thinking Kubernetes is the default or more modern choice, but EKS introduces significantly more operational complexity than ECS for a simple proof-of-concept.
Community Discussion (7 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
The question asks for the combination of steps to deploy a containerized proof-of-concept application with the LEAST operational effort. This immediately eliminates option A, which describes packaging a .zip file — this is typical for AWS Lambda or Elastic Beanstalk, not container workloads.
Correct Options: B and E
Option B is correct because the first step in any container deployment on AWS is to build the container image (typically using the Docker CLI) and push it to a container registry. Amazon Elastic Container Registry (Amazon ECR) is AWS's fully managed, AWS-native container registry that integrates seamlessly with ECS and EKS.
Option E is correct because Amazon Elastic Container Service (ECS) on AWS Fargate provides a serverless compute engine for containers. With Fargate, you do not need to provision, patch, or manage any underlying EC2 instances or Kubernetes nodes. ECS itself is far simpler than Kubernetes — it has a smaller learning curve, fewer moving parts, and is purpose-built for straightforward container orchestration on AWS.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
- Option A is wrong because it describes a .zip deployment workflow, which is not a container-based approach.
- Option C is wrong because deploying to an EC2 instance via AWS CodeDeploy still requires you to manage the underlying OS, patching, scaling, and container runtime — high operational effort.
- Option D (Amazon EKS on Fargate) is the most common trap. While EKS on Fargate removes node management, Kubernetes itself introduces significant operational complexity: you must manage pods, deployments, services, ingress, RBAC, Helm charts, and the Kubernetes control plane configuration. For a simple proof-of-concept where the goal is least operational effort, ECS is the clear winner, as confirmed by the 100% community vote.
Official Reference
Exam Strategy
When a question emphasizes 'least operational effort' for containers on AWS, always prefer ECS + Fargate over EKS unless the scenario explicitly requires Kubernetes features. Eliminate non-container options (like .zip deployments) immediately.
Related Analysis
Practice All DVA-C02 Questions
Access 100 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full DVA-C02 Practice Test →