Answer: Store the images in Amazon S3 buckets. Use Amazon DynamoDB with the geographic code as the key and the image S3 URL as the value.

## Explanation **Correct Answer: B** **Why Option B is the most cost-effective solution:** 1. **Separation of storage and metadata:** - Storing high-resolution GIS images in Amazon S3 is highly cost-effective for large binary objects - S3 provides durable, scalable, and low-cost storage for images - DynamoDB efficiently stores metadata (geographic codes and S3 URLs) 2. **Scalability during high load:** - During natural disasters when tens of thousands of images need updating every few minutes - DynamoDB can handle massive write throughput automatically - No need to provision capacity in advance or manage scaling 3. **High availability:** - Both S3 and DynamoDB are fully managed services with built-in high availability - Multi-AZ deployments are inherent in these services 4. **Cost optimization:** - S3 is significantly cheaper than database storage for large binary files - DynamoDB on-demand pricing scales with usage, avoiding over-provisioning - No Oracle licensing costs **Why other options are less optimal:** - **Option A:** Storing images in Oracle RDS is expensive for large binary objects and doesn't scale well for high write throughput - **Option C:** Storing images directly in DynamoDB is inefficient and expensive for large binary objects - **Option D:** While better than A, still uses expensive Oracle RDS for metadata when DynamoDB would be more scalable and cost-effective **Key AWS Services:** - **Amazon S3:** Optimal for storing large binary objects (images) - **Amazon DynamoDB:** Optimal for high-throughput metadata storage with predictable performance - **Geographic code as partition key:** Enables efficient querying and updates This architecture provides the best balance of cost-effectiveness, scalability, and high availability for the described use case.

Author: LeetQuiz Editorial Team