Which solution meets these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Save the .pdf files to Amazon S3. Configure an S3 PUT event to invoke an AWS Lambda function to convert the files to .jpg format and store them back in Amazon S3.
Save the .pdf files to Amazon DynamoDUse the DynamoDB Streams feature to invoke an AWS Lambda function to convert the files to .jpg format and store them back in DynamoDB.
Upload the .pdf files to an AWS Elastic Beanstalk application that includes Amazon EC2 instances, Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) storage, and an Auto Scaling group. Use a program in the EC2 instances to convert the files to .jpg format. Save the .pdf files and the .jpg files in the EBS store.
Upload the .pdf files to an AWS Elastic Beanstalk application that includes Amazon EC2 instances, Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) storage, and an Auto Scaling group. Use a program in the EC2 instances to convert the file to .jpg format. Save the .pdf files and the .jpg files in the EBS store.
Explanations:
Saving the .pdf files to Amazon S3 is cost-effective for storage. Using S3 PUT events to trigger an AWS Lambda function for file conversion allows for automatic processing without the need for managing servers. Lambda only incurs costs during execution, making it a scalable solution as demand grows.
DynamoDB is not suitable for storing large binary files like .pdf files due to its size limitations and higher costs compared to S3. Additionally, DynamoDB Streams are primarily used for change data capture and are not intended for file processing, making this approach less efficient and cost-effective.
While this option allows for EC2 instances to process the files, it is not the most cost-effective solution. Maintaining EC2 instances and EBS storage incurs higher costs due to the need for running and scaling instances, especially as demand grows. EBS is also less efficient for large file storage compared to S3.
Similar to option C, this solution also relies on EC2 instances and EFS, which leads to higher operational costs and complexity. Although EFS can provide shared storage, it is more expensive than S3 for storing large volumes of data, making it less cost-effective for this scenario.
I categorize that the answer is:
Save the .pdf files to Amazon S3. Configure an S3 PUT event to invoke an AWS Lambda function to convert the files to .jpg format and store them back in Amazon S3.