A delivery company needs to migrate its third-party route planning application to AWS. The third party supplies a supported Docker image from a public registry. The image can run in as many containers as required to generate the route map. The company has divided the delivery area into sections with supply hubs so that delivery drivers travel the shortest distance possible from the hubs to the customers. To reduce the time necessary to generate route maps, each section uses its own set of Docker containers with a custom configuration that processes orders only in the section's area. The company needs the ability to allocate resources cost-effectively based on the number of running containers. Which solution will meet these requirements with the LEAST operational overhead?
Select one answer.
Marked answer: D
Community Discussion
Written by other learners. Comments can disagree with the marked answer — check the official documentation when in doubt.
Chose D1
ECS on Fargate is the best fit here because the company wants cost-effective scaling based on the number of containers and least operational overhead. Fargate removes the need to manage EC2 infrastructure, and ECS is easier to work with than EKS unless you're running a complex Kubernetes-based microservices platform. Also, tagging is natively supported in ECS Fargate tasks using the --tags option along with --enable-ecs-managed-tags, which is perfect for cost allocation per delivery section. In contrast, tagging pods directly in EKS via CLI is not straightforward, and managing Kubernetes adds unnecessary complexity for this use case.
Chose D1
it's D, people who pick B have never worked with EKS in a prod environment :-/
