AWS Fargate Persistent Storage with EFS

SAA-C03 By islever Editorial Last updated Oct 11, 2026

Design secure workloads and applications.

Short answer

B Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an AWS Fargate launch type and mount an Amazon EFS volume for persistent storage.

Question

A company has an application that uses Docker containers in its local data center. The application runs on a container host that stores persistent data in a volume on the host. The container instances use the stored persistent data. The company wants to move the application to a fully managed service because the company does not want to manage any servers or storage infrastructure. Which solution will meet these requirements?

Use Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) with self-managed nodes. Create an Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volume attached to an Amazon EC2 instance. Use the EBS volume as a persistent volume mounted in the containers.
Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an AWS Fargate launch type. Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) volume. Add the EFS volume as a persistent storage volume mounted in the containers. Correct Answer
Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an AWS Fargate launch type. Create an Amazon S3 bucket. Map the S3 bucket as a persistent storage volume mounted in the containers.
Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an Amazon EC2 launch type. Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) volume. Add the EFS volume as a persistent storage volume mounted in the containers.

Key Takeaways

Tests the ability to select a serverless compute platform (Fargate) and compatible persistent storage (EFS) while avoiding options that require managing EC2 instances or unsupported storage mounts.

Determines the correct managed service and storage solution for stateful Docker containers on AWS without managing servers. Establishes that Amazon ECS with Fargate paired with Amazon EFS is the optimal choice for persistent, shared storage.

Common mistake: Candidates often choose S3 (Option C) assuming it provides persistent storage, but S3 cannot be mounted as a volume in Fargate containers natively, and they may overlook the 'fully managed' constraint by choosing EC2-based solutions.

Expert Analysis

Why the Answer Is Correct

Amazon ECS with the AWS Fargate launch type allows you to run containers without managing underlying servers, satisfying the requirement to avoid managing server infrastructure. Amazon EFS provides fully managed, scalable file storage that can be mounted directly into ECS tasks running on Fargate, enabling persistent data access for stateful applications.

Why the Other Options Are Wrong

Option A uses self-managed nodes, which violates the requirement to not manage any servers. Option D uses an EC2 launch type, also requiring server management. Option C suggests using S3; while S3 is persistent, it is an object store and cannot be mounted as a filesystem volume in Fargate containers without additional complex workarounds like s3fs, which are not recommended for standard persistent volume use cases in this context.

Community Comment Notes

Community consensus strongly supports B, noting that EFS is the best practice for stateful apps on Fargate. As user Marunio noted, mounting S3 is "not supported commonly" and requires manual configuration. User waldirlsantos highlighted that EFS is listed as a best practice for data persistence in ECS.

Official Reference

These links open the official vendor documentation in a new tab.

Exam Strategy

Always check for the 'serverless' or 'managed' keyword in the scenario to eliminate EC2-based options first. Then, match the storage type: use EFS/EBS for block/file persistence, not S3, unless specifically accessing objects via SDK/API.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I mount S3 as a persistent volume in Fargate?

No, S3 is an object store and cannot be mounted as a native filesystem volume in Fargate tasks. You must use EFS or FSx for Windows File Server.

Why is EBS not suitable for Fargate?

EBS volumes are tied to specific EC2 instances. Since Fargate abstracts away the underlying infrastructure and tasks can move between hosts, EBS cannot be reliably attached to Fargate tasks.

More SAA-C03 FAQ →

Community Votes

100%

100% of anonymous learners picked answer B. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.

Discussion 5 contributions

Compiled from public community threads and reader submissions, lightly edited for clarity. Handles and vote tallies are shown as recorded, and comments reflect the views of individual contributors.

From public community threads 5

Marunio 👍 8 Answered B

Mounting S3 in Fargate is not supported commonly. You'd have to make it manually. EFS is very well supported with Fargate. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66391791/how-to-mount-s3-bucket-to-ecs-fargate-container https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECS/latest/bestpracticesguide/storage.html
waldirlsantos 👍 2 Answered B

EFS is listed like a best practice for this cases "ou can use Amazon ECS to run stateful containerized applications at scale by using AWS storage services, such as Amazon EFS, Amazon EBS, or FSx for Windows File Server, that provide data persistence to inherently ephemeral containers. The term data persistence means that the data itself outlasts the process that created it. "
ogerber 👍 1 Answered C

The company does not want to manage any servers or storage infrastructure. I would go with C
Andy_09 👍 6

B looks correct
MattBJ 👍 2 Answered B

B is correct

Reader comments & corrections

No reader corrections yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.

Practice All SAA-C03 Questions

Access 120 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.

View Full SAA-C03 Practice Test →

← Back to SAA-C03 Study Guide