An online retail company is migrating its legacy on-premises .NET application to AWS. The application runs on load-balanced frontend web servers, load-balanced application servers, and a Microsoft SQL Server database. The company wants to use AWS managed services where possible and does not want to rewrite the application. A solutions architect needs to implement a solution to resolve scaling issues and minimize licensing costs as the application scales. Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
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
Shame, Babelfish doesn't work. All companies that had migrated to Babelfish from SQL Server that I know of, have had to migrate back to SQL Server.
Chose A1
Scaling: EC2 Auto Scaling + ALB handles spikes without code changes. Cost: Aurora PostgreSQL with Babelfish removes SQL Server licensing while keeping app changes minimal. Managed: Aurora + ALB are managed; no heavy ops. → Therefore, A best meets “solve scaling + minimize licensing, no rewrite.”
Chose C1
C - Fully managed Service, cost-effective and doesn't want to rewrite, those points pushed me to select C only.
