An international delivery company hosts a delivery management system on AWS. Drivers use the system to upload confirmation of delivery. Confirmation includes the recipient’s signature or a photo of the package with the recipient. The driver’s handheld device uploads signatures and photos through FTP to a single Amazon EC2 instance. Each handheld device saves a file in a directory based on the signed-in user, and the file name matches the delivery number. The EC2 instance then adds metadata to the file after querying a central database to pull delivery information. The file is then placed in Amazon S3 for archiving. As the company expands, drivers report that the system is rejecting connections. The FTP server is having problems because of dropped connections and memory issues in response to these problems, a system engineer schedules a cron task to reboot the EC2 instance every 30 minutes. The billing team reports that files are not always in the archive and that the central system is not always updated. A solutions architect needs to design a solution that maximizes scalability to ensure that the archive always receives the files and that systems are always updated. The handheld devices cannot be modified, so the company cannot deploy a new application. Which solution will meet these requirements?
Select one answer.
Marked answer: C
Community Discussion
Written by other learners. Comments can disagree with the marked answer — check the official documentation when in doubt.
Chose C1
maximize scalability is the keyword. In the question there is only 1 EC2 instance. Hence B defeats the purpose of scalability.
Chose B1
C is good but B fits bill. They can't deploy new application i.e they can't use anything other than EC2. So we have to offload to Transfer Family and mount volume to EC2. Mounting volume is not considered deploying new app, it's more like extending existing one
Chose C1
Why C wins: Serverless, durable, and scalable. Transfer Family preserves FTP, S3 ensures durability, SNS+Lambda handles processing & DB updates automatically. Removes EC2 as a bottleneck. Why B is debated: Only good if you interpret “no new app” as no new backend components, but it leaves EC2 scaling/risk issues in place.
