Question #984
A company needs to migrate 50 on-premises legacy Java EE applications to AWS. The applications are monolithic and run on Linux servers.
The company requires a solution that minimizes migration effort, avoids application code modifications, and eliminates infrastructure management. Which option best meets these requirements?
Refactor the applications into containers using AWS App2Container. Deploy the containers using Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) with the Fargate launch type.
Use AWS Application Migration Service (AWS MGN) to migrate the applications to AWS Elastic Beanstalk. Use Elastic Beanstalk to deploy and manage the applications.
Use AWS Application Migration Service (AWS MGN) to migrate the applications to Amazon EC2 instances. Manage the applications and infrastructure on EC2.
Refactor the applications into containers using AWS App2Container. Deploy the containers using Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS) with the Fargate launch type.
Explanation
The best choice is B because:
- AWS Application Migration Service (AWS MGN) performs a lift-and-shift (rehost) migration, moving applications as-is without code changes.
- Elastic Beanstalk is a Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) that handles infrastructure management (e.g., EC2, scaling, load balancing), eliminating operational overhead.
- This approach requires minimal effort compared to refactoring into containers (A/D) or managing EC2 instances manually (C).
Why other options are incorrect:
- A/D: Refactoring into containers with App2Container adds complexity, even if automated, and may require configuration changes.
- C: Migrating to EC2 shifts infrastructure management to the company, violating the requirement.
Key Points:
- Lift-and-shift (rehost) minimizes effort and code changes.
- Elastic Beanstalk abstracts infrastructure management, meeting the 'no infrastructure management' requirement.
Answer
The correct answer is: B