Practice Exams:

View All

Amazon AWS Solutions Architect Professional SAP-C02 Migration Assessment Portfolio Discovery 7Rs Practice Test

This AWS SAP-C02 AWS Certified Solutions Architect – Professional practice test focuses on migration assessment portfolio discovery 7rs tco and wave planning through original architecture scenarios aligned to the current AWS Certification exam guide. Use the full ExamSnap SAP-C02 collection for practice across all four content domains. For broader exam preparation, review the Amazon AWS Certified Solutions Architect – Professional SAP-C02 Exam Dumps page.

Instructions: Select the best answer for each question. Review the explanation after answering; each distractor includes a reason it is not the best choice for that scenario.

Question 1

For a order-processing system at Litware Manufacturing, a global expansion project identifies one priority: inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave. Which AWS design should the team choose? The current estate includes 16 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and eu-west-1. The team wants the most direct architecture decision for this requirement.

Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment
Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Use Organizations and Control Tower with a defined account/OU model, guardrails, and delegated administration for the migration landing zone
Use AWS DMS for ongoing data replication and AWS SCT when heterogeneous schema conversion is required

Correct answer: A

Why: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Option review:

A: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

B: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

C: A governed landing zone gives migration teams repeatable account baselines and prevents each wave from inventing its own security and governance model. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

D: DMS supports database data movement and change replication; SCT assists with schema and code conversion when source and target engines differ. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Learning point: Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment. Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. In this variant, the decision also has to work while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Question 2

Humongous Insurance has already validated the surrounding application components. The remaining architecture requirement for its analytics pipeline is to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave. Which option is best? The current estate includes 23 AWS accounts and active workloads in ap-southeast-1 and ap-southeast-2. The design must preserve security and auditability while meeting the stated objective.

Choose DataSync, Transfer Family, S3 transfer features, or Snow Family according to source protocol, bandwidth, data volume, and migration window
Select EC2, Elastic Beanstalk, ECS, EKS, or Fargate based on runtime constraints, orchestration requirements, portability, and desired operational ownership
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Integrate IAM Identity Center or Directory Service with the enterprise identity source and use temporary least-privilege roles during migration

Correct answer: C

Why: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Option review:

A: AWS provides online and offline data-transfer services; the correct choice depends on data size, network capacity, protocol, and acceptable transfer duration. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

B: Compute and container choices should match application packaging and the amount of infrastructure and orchestration control the team actually needs. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

C: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

D: Federated identity and role-based access preserve centralized governance and avoid proliferating long-lived local credentials during migration. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Learning point: Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition. The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. In this variant, the decision also has to work while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Question 3

While conducting a migration wave planning session, the migration architect at Tailspin Logistics needs to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave. Which architecture decision best matches the stated constraints? The current estate includes 30 AWS accounts and active workloads in eu-west-1 and eu-central-1. Select the option that satisfies the requirement with the fewest unnecessary moving parts.

Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Select the purpose-built managed database that matches relational, key-value, search, or other access patterns, retaining self-managed EC2 only when required controls justify it
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Use event-driven integration with services such as SQS, SNS, EventBridge, Step Functions, and Lambda to decouple components and remove server management where appropriate

Correct answer: A

Why: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Option review:

A: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

B: Database replatforming should balance access model, compatibility, scale, availability, and the operational burden the organization is willing to own. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

C: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

D: Serverless and managed integration services can isolate failures, buffer bursts, and eliminate undifferentiated server operations for suitable workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Learning point: Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together. Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. In this variant, the decision also has to work while fitting the change into a repeatable migration wave.

Question 4

During a post-incident architecture review at Alpine Sports, the principal solutions architect is designing a global web application. The requirement is to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint. Which architecture is the best fit? The current estate includes 37 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and us-west-2. Choose the option that best meets the stated constraints without introducing an unrelated redesign.

Select the AWS storage service whose access protocol, durability, throughput, sharing model, and hybrid requirements match the application
Choose DataSync, Transfer Family, S3 transfer features, or Snow Family according to source protocol, bandwidth, data volume, and migration window
Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment

Correct answer: D

Option review:

A: AWS storage services expose different block, file, object, and hybrid semantics; the correct target depends on how the application reads and writes data. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

B: AWS provides online and offline data-transfer services; the correct choice depends on data size, network capacity, protocol, and acceptable transfer duration. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

C: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

D: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

Question 5

Adventure Works is documenting its target-state architecture. Which choice most accurately addresses the need to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint? The current estate includes 44 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and eu-west-1. Assume all unspecified components already meet their requirements.

Select EC2, Elastic Beanstalk, ECS, EKS, or Fargate based on runtime constraints, orchestration requirements, portability, and desired operational ownership
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Use appropriate Direct Connect or VPN connectivity, Route 53/DNS coexistence, encryption, and tightly scoped network/security controls for the migration path
Select the AWS storage service whose access protocol, durability, throughput, sharing model, and hybrid requirements match the application

Correct answer: B

Option review:

A: Compute and container choices should match application packaging and the amount of infrastructure and orchestration control the team actually needs. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

B: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

C: Migration networks often coexist with production; connectivity, DNS, encryption, and access controls must be designed for both the transition and final state. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

D: AWS storage services expose different block, file, object, and hybrid semantics; the correct target depends on how the application reads and writes data. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

Question 6

A enterprise architect at VanArsdel Energy is reviewing a analytics pipeline. The business requires the team to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint. Which design most directly satisfies the requirement? The current estate includes 4 AWS accounts and active workloads in ap-southeast-1 and ap-southeast-2. Prefer an AWS-managed capability when it meets the requirements with less operational overhead.

Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Select the purpose-built managed database that matches relational, key-value, search, or other access patterns, retaining self-managed EC2 only when required controls justify it
Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope

Correct answer: B

Option review:

A: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

B: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

C: Database replatforming should balance access model, compatibility, scale, availability, and the operational burden the organization is willing to own. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

D: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of with a defined cutover and rollback checkpoint.

Question 7

Contoso Retail is changing its media processing platform as part of a production readiness review. Which AWS approach best enables the team to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves without weakening the landing-zone security baseline? The current estate includes 11 AWS accounts and active workloads in eu-west-1 and eu-central-1. The team wants the most direct architecture decision for this requirement.

Use event-driven integration with services such as SQS, SNS, EventBridge, Step Functions, and Lambda to decouple components and remove server management where appropriate
Choose purpose-built storage and database services per component, using managed elasticity and caching where they fit the access pattern
Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment
Use appropriate Direct Connect or VPN connectivity, Route 53/DNS coexistence, encryption, and tightly scoped network/security controls for the migration path

Correct answer: C

Why: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Option review:

A: Serverless and managed integration services can isolate failures, buffer bursts, and eliminate undifferentiated server operations for suitable workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

B: Modernization often improves scalability and operations by replacing one generalized data platform with services optimized for object, file, key-value, relational, or cache workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

C: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

D: Migration networks often coexist with production; connectivity, DNS, encryption, and access controls must be designed for both the transition and final state. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Learning point: Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment. Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. In this variant, the decision also has to work without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Question 8

An architecture board at Lucerne Publishing asks the security architect to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy without weakening the landing-zone security baseline for a global web application. Which recommendation is most appropriate? The current estate includes 18 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and us-west-2. The design must preserve security and auditability while meeting the stated objective.

Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Select the AWS storage service whose access protocol, durability, throughput, sharing model, and hybrid requirements match the application
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition

Correct answer: D

Why: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Option review:

A: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

B: AWS storage services expose different block, file, object, and hybrid semantics; the correct target depends on how the application reads and writes data. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

C: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

D: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Learning point: Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition. The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. In this variant, the decision also has to work without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Question 9

For a order-processing system at A. Datum Analytics, a hybrid connectivity redesign identifies one priority: avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency without weakening the landing-zone security baseline. Which AWS design should the team choose? The current estate includes 25 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and eu-west-1. Select the option that satisfies the requirement with the fewest unnecessary moving parts.

Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Use event-driven integration with services such as SQS, SNS, EventBridge, Step Functions, and Lambda to decouple components and remove server management where appropriate
Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment

Correct answer: A

Why: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Option review:

A: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

B: Serverless and managed integration services can isolate failures, buffer bursts, and eliminate undifferentiated server operations for suitable workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

C: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

D: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Learning point: Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together. Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. In this variant, the decision also has to work without weakening the landing-zone security baseline.

Question 10

A principal architect asks which AWS approach is intended to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves while preserving data integrity through cutover. What is the best answer? The current estate includes 32 AWS accounts and active workloads in ap-southeast-1 and ap-southeast-2. Choose the option that best meets the stated constraints without introducing an unrelated redesign.

Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Select EC2, Elastic Beanstalk, ECS, EKS, or Fargate based on runtime constraints, orchestration requirements, portability, and desired operational ownership
Select ECS or EKS according to orchestration requirements and use Fargate when serverless container compute meets the workload needs

Correct answer: A

Option review:

B: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

C: Compute and container choices should match application packaging and the amount of infrastructure and orchestration control the team actually needs. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

D: AWS container options provide different levels of Kubernetes compatibility, AWS-native orchestration, and infrastructure ownership. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

Question 11

While conducting a new workload design, the migration architect at Bellows University needs to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy while preserving data integrity through cutover. Which architecture decision best matches the stated constraints? The current estate includes 39 AWS accounts and active workloads in eu-west-1 and eu-central-1. Assume all unspecified components already meet their requirements.

Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Use Organizations and Control Tower with a defined account/OU model, guardrails, and delegated administration for the migration landing zone
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Choose DataSync, Transfer Family, S3 transfer features, or Snow Family according to source protocol, bandwidth, data volume, and migration window

Correct answer: C

Option review:

B: A governed landing zone gives migration teams repeatable account baselines and prevents each wave from inventing its own security and governance model. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

D: AWS provides online and offline data-transfer services; the correct choice depends on data size, network capacity, protocol, and acceptable transfer duration. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

Question 12

During a cost optimization workshop at Blue Yonder Airlines, the principal solutions architect is designing a global web application. The requirement is to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency while preserving data integrity through cutover. Which architecture is the best fit? The current estate includes 46 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and us-west-2. Prefer an AWS-managed capability when it meets the requirements with less operational overhead.

Integrate IAM Identity Center or Directory Service with the enterprise identity source and use temporary least-privilege roles during migration
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Choose purpose-built storage and database services per component, using managed elasticity and caching where they fit the access pattern

Correct answer: B

Option review:

A: Federated identity and role-based access preserve centralized governance and avoid proliferating long-lived local credentials during migration. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

C: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

D: Modernization often improves scalability and operations by replacing one generalized data platform with services optimized for object, file, key-value, relational, or cache workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while preserving data integrity through cutover.

Question 13

City Power operates a order-processing system. In a global expansion project, the network architect must inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves while minimizing business interruption during migration. Which option should be recommended? The current estate includes 6 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and eu-west-1. The team wants the most direct architecture decision for this requirement.

Select the AWS storage service whose access protocol, durability, throughput, sharing model, and hybrid requirements match the application
Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment
Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Select EC2, Elastic Beanstalk, ECS, EKS, or Fargate based on runtime constraints, orchestration requirements, portability, and desired operational ownership

Correct answer: B

Option review:

B: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while minimizing business interruption during migration.

D: Compute and container choices should match application packaging and the amount of infrastructure and orchestration control the team actually needs. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while minimizing business interruption during migration.

Question 14

A enterprise architect at Proseware Labs is reviewing a analytics pipeline. The business requires the team to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy while minimizing business interruption during migration. Which design most directly satisfies the requirement? The current estate includes 13 AWS accounts and active workloads in ap-southeast-1 and ap-southeast-2. The design must preserve security and auditability while meeting the stated objective.

Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Select the AWS storage service whose access protocol, durability, throughput, sharing model, and hybrid requirements match the application
Select the purpose-built managed database that matches relational, key-value, search, or other access patterns, retaining self-managed EC2 only when required controls justify it

Correct answer: A

Option review:

A: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while minimizing business interruption during migration.

B: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while minimizing business interruption during migration.

C: AWS storage services expose different block, file, object, and hybrid semantics; the correct target depends on how the application reads and writes data. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while minimizing business interruption during migration.

D: Database replatforming should balance access model, compatibility, scale, availability, and the operational burden the organization is willing to own. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while minimizing business interruption during migration.

Question 15

Which solution is the strongest match for the following professional-level architecture requirement: avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency while minimizing business interruption during migration? The current estate includes 20 AWS accounts and active workloads in eu-west-1 and eu-central-1. Select the option that satisfies the requirement with the fewest unnecessary moving parts.

Integrate IAM Identity Center or Directory Service with the enterprise identity source and use temporary least-privilege roles during migration
Use AWS DMS for ongoing data replication and AWS SCT when heterogeneous schema conversion is required
Use event-driven integration with services such as SQS, SNS, EventBridge, Step Functions, and Lambda to decouple components and remove server management where appropriate
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together

Correct answer: D

Option review:

B: DMS supports database data movement and change replication; SCT assists with schema and code conversion when source and target engines differ. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while minimizing business interruption during migration.

C: Serverless and managed integration services can isolate failures, buffer bursts, and eliminate undifferentiated server operations for suitable workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while minimizing business interruption during migration.

D: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while minimizing business interruption during migration.

Question 16

An architecture board at Woodgrove Bank asks the security architect to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move for a global web application. Which recommendation is most appropriate? The current estate includes 27 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and us-west-2. Choose the option that best meets the stated constraints without introducing an unrelated redesign.

Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Use AWS DMS for ongoing data replication and AWS SCT when heterogeneous schema conversion is required
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition

Correct answer: A

Why: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Option review:

A: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

C: DMS supports database data movement and change replication; SCT assists with schema and code conversion when source and target engines differ. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

D: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Learning point: Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment. Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. In this variant, the decision also has to work while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Question 17

For a order-processing system at Relecloud Systems, a security design review identifies one priority: avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move. Which AWS design should the team choose? The current estate includes 34 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and eu-west-1. Assume all unspecified components already meet their requirements.

Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Select EC2, Elastic Beanstalk, ECS, EKS, or Fargate based on runtime constraints, orchestration requirements, portability, and desired operational ownership
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Use Organizations and Control Tower with a defined account/OU model, guardrails, and delegated administration for the migration landing zone

Correct answer: A

Why: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Option review:

B: Compute and container choices should match application packaging and the amount of infrastructure and orchestration control the team actually needs. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

C: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

D: A governed landing zone gives migration teams repeatable account baselines and prevents each wave from inventing its own security and governance model. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Learning point: Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition. The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. In this variant, the decision also has to work while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Question 18

Fabrikam Health has already validated the surrounding application components. The remaining architecture requirement for its analytics pipeline is to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move. Which option is best? The current estate includes 41 AWS accounts and active workloads in ap-southeast-1 and ap-southeast-2. Prefer an AWS-managed capability when it meets the requirements with less operational overhead.

Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Use event-driven integration with services such as SQS, SNS, EventBridge, Step Functions, and Lambda to decouple components and remove server management where appropriate
Choose purpose-built storage and database services per component, using managed elasticity and caching where they fit the access pattern
Integrate IAM Identity Center or Directory Service with the enterprise identity source and use temporary least-privilege roles during migration

Correct answer: A

Why: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Option review:

A: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

B: Serverless and managed integration services can isolate failures, buffer bursts, and eliminate undifferentiated server operations for suitable workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

C: Modernization often improves scalability and operations by replacing one generalized data platform with services optimized for object, file, key-value, relational, or cache workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

D: Federated identity and role-based access preserve centralized governance and avoid proliferating long-lived local credentials during migration. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Learning point: Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together. Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. In this variant, the decision also has to work while accounting for workload dependencies before sequencing the move.

Question 19

While conducting a production readiness review, the migration architect at Trey Research needs to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts. Which architecture decision best matches the stated constraints? The current estate includes 48 AWS accounts and active workloads in eu-west-1 and eu-central-1. The team wants the most direct architecture decision for this requirement.

Choose purpose-built storage and database services per component, using managed elasticity and caching where they fit the access pattern
Select the AWS storage service whose access protocol, durability, throughput, sharing model, and hybrid requirements match the application
Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment
Select ECS or EKS according to orchestration requirements and use Fargate when serverless container compute meets the workload needs

Correct answer: C

Why: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Option review:

A: Modernization often improves scalability and operations by replacing one generalized data platform with services optimized for object, file, key-value, relational, or cache workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

B: AWS storage services expose different block, file, object, and hybrid semantics; the correct target depends on how the application reads and writes data. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

C: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Learning point: Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment. Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. In this variant, the decision also has to work while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Question 20

Which AWS architecture principle or service combination best addresses this requirement for Northwind Media: avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts? The current estate includes 8 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and us-west-2. The design must preserve security and auditability while meeting the stated objective.

Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Select the purpose-built managed database that matches relational, key-value, search, or other access patterns, retaining self-managed EC2 only when required controls justify it
Use Organizations and Control Tower with a defined account/OU model, guardrails, and delegated administration for the migration landing zone

Correct answer: B

Why: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Option review:

A: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

C: Database replatforming should balance access model, compatibility, scale, availability, and the operational burden the organization is willing to own. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

D: A governed landing zone gives migration teams repeatable account baselines and prevents each wave from inventing its own security and governance model. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Learning point: Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition. The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. In this variant, the decision also has to work while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Question 21

Coho Financial operates a order-processing system. In a hybrid connectivity redesign, the network architect must avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts. Which option should be recommended? The current estate includes 15 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and eu-west-1. Select the option that satisfies the requirement with the fewest unnecessary moving parts.

Select EC2, Elastic Beanstalk, ECS, EKS, or Fargate based on runtime constraints, orchestration requirements, portability, and desired operational ownership
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment

Correct answer: C

Why: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Option review:

A: Compute and container choices should match application packaging and the amount of infrastructure and orchestration control the team actually needs. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

B: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

C: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

D: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Learning point: Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together. Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. In this variant, the decision also has to work while keeping governance consistent across destination accounts.

Question 22

A enterprise architect at Lamna Healthcare is reviewing a analytics pipeline. The business requires the team to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed. Which design most directly satisfies the requirement? The current estate includes 22 AWS accounts and active workloads in ap-southeast-1 and ap-southeast-2. Choose the option that best meets the stated constraints without introducing an unrelated redesign.

Select EC2, Elastic Beanstalk, ECS, EKS, or Fargate based on runtime constraints, orchestration requirements, portability, and desired operational ownership
Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment

Correct answer: D

Why: Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Option review:

A: Compute and container choices should match application packaging and the amount of infrastructure and orchestration control the team actually needs. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

B: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

C: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to inventory applications, dependencies, owners, and utilization before deciding migration waves under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Learning point: Use migration discovery and assessment tooling such as Migration Hub and application inventory data to build a dependency-aware portfolio assessment. Migration planning starts with reliable inventory, ownership, dependency, and utilization data so scope and sequencing reflect the real estate. In this variant, the decision also has to work without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Question 23

Fourth Coffee is changing its media processing platform as part of a new workload design. Which AWS approach best enables the team to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed? The current estate includes 29 AWS accounts and active workloads in eu-west-1 and eu-central-1. Assume all unspecified components already meet their requirements.

Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition
Use Organizations and Control Tower with a defined account/OU model, guardrails, and delegated administration for the migration landing zone
Use event-driven integration with services such as SQS, SNS, EventBridge, Step Functions, and Lambda to decouple components and remove server management where appropriate
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together

Correct answer: A

Why: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Option review:

A: The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

C: Serverless and managed integration services can isolate failures, buffer bursts, and eliminate undifferentiated server operations for suitable workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

D: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid forcing every workload into the same migration strategy under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Learning point: Classify each workload using the 7Rs and document the business and technical rationale for the selected disposition. The 7Rs provide a portfolio decision framework; the right choice depends on constraints, value, risk, and desired modernization depth. In this variant, the decision also has to work without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Question 24

An architecture board at Consolidated Messenger asks the security architect to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed for a global web application. Which recommendation is most appropriate? The current estate includes 36 AWS accounts and active workloads in us-east-1 and us-west-2. Prefer an AWS-managed capability when it meets the requirements with less operational overhead.

Use AWS Application Migration Service for supported rehost migrations and discovery tooling to understand server and dependency scope
Select the purpose-built managed database that matches relational, key-value, search, or other access patterns, retaining self-managed EC2 only when required controls justify it
Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together
Use event-driven integration with services such as SQS, SNS, EventBridge, Step Functions, and Lambda to decouple components and remove server management where appropriate

Correct answer: C

Why: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Option review:

A: Application Migration Service is designed for lift-and-shift server migration with continuous replication and controlled cutover. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

B: Database replatforming should balance access model, compatibility, scale, availability, and the operational burden the organization is willing to own. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

C: Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. This directly addresses the primary requirement and remains appropriate without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

D: Serverless and managed integration services can isolate failures, buffer bursts, and eliminate undifferentiated server operations for suitable workloads. This can be valid in another AWS architecture context, but it does not most directly satisfy the primary requirement to avoid moving tightly coupled applications in separate waves that would create unnecessary cross-environment latency under the additional constraint of without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Learning point: Use TCO analysis plus dependency-aware wave planning to prioritize migrations and group workloads that should move together. Migration sequence and business case should account for dependencies, operational readiness, transition costs, and expected steady-state economics. In this variant, the decision also has to work without forcing an unrelated refactor before the migration can proceed.

Question 1

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4

Question 5

Question 6

Question 7

Question 8

Question 9

Question 10

Question 11

Question 12

Question 13

Question 14

Question 15

Question 16

Question 17

Question 18

Question 19

Question 20

Question 21

Question 22

Question 23

Question 24

Related posts: