A company is planning to migrate a legacy core banking audit system to AWS. The system consists of three main components:
1. Reporting Frontend: A Java Tomcat application running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) virtual machines. Due to strict compliance regulations, no code modifications can be made, and the migration must be completed within a tight two-week cutover window.
2. Transaction Database: An Oracle Database Enterprise Edition instance containing proprietary PL/SQL business logic. The company wants to migrate this to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL to eliminate expensive licensing costs.
3. Audit Log Store: An on-premises NFS file share containing millions of read-only text files. The company wants to move this to a managed service on AWS to reduce storage costs and administrative overhead, while keeping the NFS interface without changing how the frontend accesses the files.
Which combination of migration strategies represents the most appropriate path for each component to meet the company's requirements?
- Rehost the reporting frontend on Amazon EC2; Refactor the transaction database by converting the schema and migrating to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL; Replatform the audit log store to Amazon EFS.Cevap
- BRehost the reporting frontend on Amazon EC2; Replatform the transaction database by converting the schema and migrating to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL; Replatform the audit log store to Amazon EFS.
- CReplatform the reporting frontend by migrating to AWS Elastic Beanstalk; Refactor the transaction database by converting the schema and migrating to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL; Rehost the audit log store on an Amazon EC2 instance running a self-managed NFS server.
- DRefactor the reporting frontend to run as serverless functions on AWS Lambda; Refactor the transaction database by converting the schema and migrating to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL; Replatform the audit log store to Amazon EFS.