What should a solutions architect recommend to meet these requirements?
Deploy an AWS Storage Gateway file gateway as a virtual machine (VM) on premises at each clinic
Migrate the files to each clinic’s on-premises applications by using AWS DataSync for processing.
Deploy an AWS Storage Gateway volume gateway as a virtual machine (VM) on premises at each clinic.
Attach an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) file system to each clinic’s on-premises servers.
Explanations:
Deploying an AWS Storage Gateway file gateway enables on-premises applications to access Amazon S3 storage as if it were a local file system. It provides low-latency access to S3 data, which aligns with the requirement of minimum latency for clinics’ file-based applications.
AWS DataSync is used for large-scale data migration, not for providing low-latency access to files. It’s designed for moving data between on-premises storage and AWS, which does not meet the requirement of minimizing latency for on-premises applications.
AWS Storage Gateway volume gateway is used for block storage (EBS-like), not for file-based applications. It would not be ideal for providing file access as required in this scenario.
Amazon EFS is a managed file system for use within AWS environments, not for direct access by on-premises applications. It doesn’t meet the requirement for making S3 data available with minimum latency to clinics across the country.
If memory serves me right, the answer is:
Deploy an AWS Storage Gateway file gateway as a virtual machine (VM) on premises at each clinic