A media broadcasting company is planning to migrate its regional digital asset archiving and distribution portfolio to AWS. The portfolio consists of the following components:
1. A web ingest API tier running on custom-compiled Linux binaries that requires low-latency processing and has no source code or build pipeline documentation available.
2. A metadata database running on Microsoft SQL Server 2019 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server 2016, utilizing proprietary CLR (Common Language Runtime) integrations, which must remain on SQL Server due to vendor compliance, but needs to eliminate OS-level licensing and management overhead.
3. A cold-storage legacy tape-archiving daemon that integrates with local physical storage area networks (SAN) via proprietary Fibre Channel protocol, which must remain on-premises due to compliance and hardware dependency.
The migration must be completed within a strict three-month timeline, and the company requires minimal operational overhead for database management.
Which two of the following migration strategies correctly align with these requirements?
- Rehost the web ingest API tier using AWS Application Migration Service (MGN), and replatform the metadata database to Amazon RDS for SQL Server.Answer
- Retain the legacy tape-archiving daemon on-premises, and replatform the metadata database to Amazon RDS for SQL Server.Answer
- CRefactor the metadata database by migrating it to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL using the AWS Schema Conversion Tool (SCT) to eliminate SQL Server licensing.
- DReplatform the web ingest API tier by containerizing the custom-compiled Linux binaries and deploying them to AWS Fargate to minimize server management.
- ERelocate the legacy tape-archiving daemon to AWS Storage Gateway Volume Gateway to eliminate physical SAN dependencies.