Public-works engineers need concurrent shared access to CAD drawings from multiple Linux compute nodes with file-lock semantics. Objects in a bucket alone have caused collaboration pain. Which storage choice best matches the access pattern?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
CAD with real file locks wants a shared file system—EFS or the right FSx—not a bucket pretending to be a network drive. Keep S3 for object-style distribution when locks aren’t the point.
Full Explanation
Concurrent CAD access with file-lock semantics maps to shared file systems such as Amazon EFS or suitable Amazon FSx offerings. S3 object storage lacks POSIX file-lock collaboration semantics. Manual rsync of instance stores and single-bastion local disks create bottlenecks and SPOFs. Selecting storage by access pattern is the Task 2.5 requirement.