Migrating On-Premises NFS to AWS Cost-Effectively
Short answer
B Use AWS Storage Gateway Amazon S3 File Gateway with an S3 Lifecycle policy to migrate on-premises NFS storage cost-effectively.
Question
Key Takeaways
The question tests the ability to map legacy on-premises protocols (NFS) to modern AWS services while prioritizing cost-efficiency through lifecycle policies.
This question addresses the most cost-effective method for migrating on-premises NFS storage to AWS. It establishes that AWS Storage Gateway File Gateway is the optimal choice for hybrid file storage workloads.
Common mistake: Learners often choose EFS Standard-IA because they focus solely on 'cost' and miss the critical requirement of maintaining the existing NFS interface for application compatibility.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Option B is correct because AWS Storage Gateway provides a native NFS interface, allowing on-premises applications to access data stored in Amazon S3 without code changes. This seamless integration is crucial for minimizing migration effort and risk. By using an S3 Lifecycle policy, the company can automatically transition data to cheaper storage classes (like Glacier or S3 Infrequent Access) as it ages, directly addressing the cost-effectiveness requirement.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A uses Volume Gateway, which presents block storage volumes (iSCSI), not file shares (NFS/SMB). Since the current workload relies on NFS, this would require significant application refactoring. Options C and D use Amazon EFS. While EFS supports NFS, it is generally more expensive than S3-based solutions for large-scale, infrequently accessed data. Furthermore, EFS does not offer the same granular lifecycle automation into deep-archive tiers as S3, making it less cost-effective for this specific scenario.
Community Comment Notes
The community overwhelmingly selected Option B, recognizing the direct mapping between NFS and File Gateway. One user noted that "S3 File Gateway => Best for NFS-like file storage workloads," highlighting the protocol match. Another commenter expressed confusion about why infrequent access options were distractors, but the key differentiator remains the storage interface and underlying cost model.
Exam Strategy
When migrating from on-premises file systems, always look for AWS Storage Gateway first if you need to maintain the existing protocol (NFS/SMB) with minimal application changes. Remember that S3 is significantly cheaper than EFS for long-term storage, especially when combined with lifecycle policies.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why not use EFS Standard-IA for cost savings?
Does File Gateway support NFS?
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer B. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Discussion 9 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 9
-
alawada 👍 9 Answered BThis solution meets the requirements most cost-effectively because it enables the company to migrate its on-premises NFS data store to AWS without changing the existing applications or workflows. AWS Storage Gateway is a hybrid cloud storage service that provides seamless and secure integration between on-premises and AWS storage. Amazon S3 File Gateway is a type of AWS Storage Gateway that provides a file interface to Amazon S3, with local caching for low-latency access. By setting up an Amazon S3 File Gateway, the company can store and retrieve files as objects in Amazon S3 using standard file protocols such as NFS.
-
mk168898 👍 2 Answered BS3 File Gateway => Best for NFS-like file storage workloads
-
Scheldon 👍 1 Answered DAnswerD Taking into consideration that we are talking about social media company probably storing a lot of quite small files i would say it cannot be Option A or B. For example Amazon S3 File Gateway pricing Storage Pricing Storage Pricing Stored and billed as Amazon S3 objects. Request Pricing Data written to AWS storage by your gateway $0.01 per GB† File storage in S3 Billed as Amazon S3 requests. It can be quite expensive, especially when we will be working on small files. I would go with EFS with OneZone-IA (option D) which should be less expensive taking into consideration that we are paying only for Storage and Data Transfer (per GB). But to be honest we need more information to device which solution will be better.
-
LeonSauveterre 👍 1 Answered BI'm a little confused by option C & D. How does infrequent access have anything to do with this?
-
Gorkha 👍 1 Answered Bas their is nfs = file gateway
Show 4 more comments
-
seetpt 👍 3 Answered BI think B too
-
asdfcdsxdfc 👍 2 Answered BB looks correct
-
alawada 👍 2 Answered Byeah B
-
hharbiordun85 👍 1Answer: C
Reader comments & corrections
No reader corrections yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Related Analysis
Practice All SAA-C03 Questions
Access 120 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full SAA-C03 Practice Test →