Which solution will meet these requirements while providing the FASTEST storage performance?

Explanations:

Amazon EFS provides a managed, scalable file storage solution that can be accessed concurrently by multiple pods across different Availability Zones, making it ideal for sharing files among instances. It also supports integration with AWS Backup for long-term retention, meeting the requirement of backing up files for 1 year while providing good performance for small files.

While Amazon EBS can provide high performance, it does not support multi-Attach for read-write access from multiple pods simultaneously unless using specific configurations that may complicate access. EBS is generally better suited for single-instance use, and using it in this way could lead to potential data corruption issues when accessed by multiple pods concurrently. Additionally, backups would require more manual configuration.

Amazon S3 is not a file system and cannot be mounted like EFS or EBS. Although it provides excellent durability and a lifecycle management policy, accessing small files may incur higher latency compared to EFS. Furthermore, using S3 for file storage in this manner can introduce complexities in handling file operations, which are not suited for applications requiring high-speed access to many small files.

Using local storage on each pod limits accessibility to the files, as they cannot be shared among instances effectively. This approach also complicates backup management, as it requires additional tools and processes for backup and restoration. Without a centralized storage solution, there is a risk of data loss if pods are terminated or fail.