Which solution will meet these requirements?
Use Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) with self-managed nodes. Create an Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) volume attached to an Amazon EC2 instance. Use the EBS volume as a persistent volume mounted in the containers.
Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an AWS Fargate launch type. Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) volume. Add the EFS volume as a persistent storage volume mounted in the containers.
Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an AWS Fargate launch type. Create an Amazon S3 bucket. Map the S3 bucket as a persistent storage volume mounted in the containers.
Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an Amazon EC2 launch type. Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) volume. Add the EFS volume as a persistent storage volume mounted in the containers.
Explanations:
Amazon EKS with self-managed nodes requires management of EC2 instances and storage, which contradicts the requirement for a fully managed service.
Amazon ECS with AWS Fargate provides a fully managed service. Using Amazon EFS for persistent storage allows containers to access shared data without managing underlying servers.
Amazon S3 is not a suitable option for persistent storage in a containerized application as it is an object storage service, not a file system. Containers require a file system interface for persistent data.
While Amazon ECS with EC2 can use EFS for persistent storage, it does not fulfill the requirement for a fully managed service, as it still involves managing EC2 instances.
I classify that the answer is:
Use Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with an AWS Fargate launch type. Create an Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) volume. Add the EFS volume as a persistent storage volume mounted in the containers.