The correct choices are: Place the static resources in an S3 bucket and distribute them using Amazon CloudFront to enhance availability and Host the server-side application logic on Amazon FSx for Windows File Server and mount it across the EC2 fleet.

Amazon S3 combined with Amazon CloudFront is a best-practice approach for distributing static content like HTML, images, or JavaScript at scale. S3 offers high durability and availability, while CloudFront caches content at edge locations globally, improving performance and reducing origin load. This setup ensures that static files are highly available and quickly delivered to users anywhere.

FSx for Windows File Server is purpose-built for Windows-based applications needing a shared file system. It supports the SMB protocol and integrates natively with Active Directory, making it ideal for hosting shared application logic in a Windows Server environment. It ensures high availability and fault tolerance and can be mounted by multiple EC2 Windows instances simultaneously.

The suggestion to use Amazon ElastiCache to serve static content from S3 is incorrect because ElastiCache is designed to cache dynamic content or frequent query resultsnot static assets like images or HTML. It also does not integrate directly with S3 for content delivery.

Choosing to install the application backend code on an EBS volume and mount the same volume to multiple Windows EC2 instances is invalid. Amazon EBS volumes cannot be simultaneously attached to multiple Windows EC2 instances. EBS is designed for single-instance attachment unless using specialized multi-attach volumes on Linux, and even then, not for Windows or complex workloads like shared application code.

The idea to store the backend logic in Amazon EFS and mount it on all EC2 instances is also incorrect for Windows-based workloads. Amazon EFS supports NFS, which is native to Linux. While Windows EC2 instances can access EFS with some additional setup, FSx for Windows is the correct native choice for Windows environments.

This question is significant because it assesses both your understanding of AWS storage options and your ability to tailor solutions to operating system constraints. When you see static assets mentioned alongside global distribution needs, S3 with CloudFront is almost always a strong choice. If the backend is running on Windows, FSx for Windows is a clear indicator.

The challenge in this question lies in evaluating multiple storage choices and recognizing which AWS services are OS-specific. Many learners default to EFS or EBS without considering compatibility or limitations. The trick is to match storage protocolsSMB for Windows, NFS for Linuxand recognize that only S3 and CloudFront offer true edge distribution for static content.

Full AWS Practitioner Certification Question