Which solution will meet these requirements MOST cost-effectively?
Store images in Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS). Use a web server that runs on Amazon EC2.
Store images in Amazon Elastic File System (Amazon EFS). Use a web server that runs on Amazon EC2.
Store images in Amazon S3 Standard. Use S3 Standard to directly deliver images by using a static website.
Store images in Amazon S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA). Use S3 Standard-IA to directly deliver images by using a static website.
Explanations:
Amazon EBS is not suited for storing and serving infrequently accessed, highly available data like images; it also requires EC2, increasing cost and complexity.
Amazon EFS is not cost-effective for infrequent access patterns and requires EC2 instances to serve content, leading to higher costs and unnecessary infrastructure.
Amazon S3 Standard offers high availability but is more expensive than necessary for infrequent access. It does not optimize costs for images accessed occasionally.
Amazon S3 Standard-IA provides high availability with cost optimization for infrequently accessed data. It is the most cost-effective solution for this use case.
I compute that the answer is:
Store images in Amazon S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA). Use S3 Standard-IA to directly deliver images by using a static website.
I suspect that the answer is:
Store images in Amazon S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA). Use S3 Standard-IA to directly deliver images by using a static website.