Migrate a self-managed Kubernetes cluster to EKS with managed node groups
A company wants to migrate its website to AWS. The website uses microservices and runs on containers that are deployed in an on-premises, self-managed Kubernetes cluster. All the manifests that define the deployments for the containers in the Kubernetes deployment are in source control. All data for the website is stored in a PostgreSQL database. An open source container image repository runs alongside the on-premises environment. A solutions architect needs to determine the architecture that the company will use for the website on AWS. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST effort to migrate?
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
EKS with managed node groups accepts the existing Kubernetes manifests with minimal change, so the artifacts the team already maintains in source control carry over directly, and managed node groups remove the node lifecycle the team had to operate itself.
A website runs as microservices on containers in an on-premises self-managed Kubernetes cluster, with all deployment manifests in source control and an open source container image repository alongside the on-premises environment. The team must determine the target architecture with the least migration effort.
Rebuilding the Kubernetes control plane on EC2 instances. That is a lift-and-shift of the cluster's own infrastructure rather than a migration to a managed service, and it leaves the team responsible for control plane upgrades, etcd backups, and node management with no reduction in effort.
Community Discussion (10 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
The team's source of truth is the Kubernetes manifests in source control, so the lowest-effort target is a managed Kubernetes service that runs those manifests as they are. Amazon EKS with managed node groups accepts the existing deployment manifests, and the container images can be copied into an Amazon ECR repository so the manifests point at a registry the cluster can pull from. Managed node groups remove the responsibility for provisioning and managing the worker nodes, which is the part a self-managed cluster forces the team to own. Aurora PostgreSQL is the natural managed relational target for the existing PostgreSQL data.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
A: Amazon App Runner is a fully managed service for building and running containerized applications, but it does not run Kubernetes deployment manifests, so the team's existing manifests would have to be converted into an App Runner service configuration, which is more translation work rather than less. C: ECS requires each container image to be registered as a new task definition and an ECS service to be created for each, so the Kubernetes manifests must be rewritten into ECS constructs, which is also more work. D: Rebuilding the cluster on EC2 instances means the team still operates the Kubernetes control plane, so this is a lift-and-shift of infrastructure to maintain rather than a move to a managed service, and it also requires migrating the image repository and running a self-managed PostgreSQL server on the same cluster.Community Comment Notes
The community voted 100 to 0 for B, with the top-voted comment linking the AWS architecture field notes on migrating a self-managed Kubernetes cluster on EC2 to Amazon EKS. A dissenting comment observed that EKS still requires manifest adjustments and questioned whether it is genuinely the least effort, while another noted that option D is the true lift-and-shift, but neither addressed that D leaves the team owning the control plane, which is the effort the question asks to minimise.Official Reference
Related Analysis
Practice All SAP-C02 Questions
Access 85 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full SAP-C02 Practice Test →