Rapid global deployment primarily supports the earlier need to make a proven application available in a newly targeted market quickly because cloud infrastructure in multiple geographic regions reduces the need to construct local facilities, but the new task is to choose a physical deployment geography to address customers or regulatory constraints; that is why Geographic flexibility is preferable here.

Global reach is intended to serve customers in distant geographies with regional deployments because AWS Regions allow workloads to run closer to users in multiple geographic markets; in this design the new outcome is to choose a physical deployment geography to address customers or regulatory constraints, which calls for Geographic flexibility rather than Global reach or the earlier Rapid global deployment.

Self-service provisioning is intended to create an environment without waiting for physical equipment installation because authorized teams can provision cloud resources through APIs or a console when they are needed; in this design the new outcome is to choose a physical deployment geography to address customers or regulatory constraints, which calls for Geographic flexibility rather than Self-service provisioning or the earlier Rapid global deployment.

AWS CAF Operations perspective addresses the separate need to prepare support, monitoring and service operations for migrated workloads because the Operations perspective develops capabilities for operating workloads effectively; it is not as direct as AWS CAF Platform perspective for the actual requirement to establish technical foundations for hosting and building cloud workloads.

Migration Evaluator addresses the separate need to develop a data-informed financial business case for migration because migration Evaluator supports assessing on-premises resource usage and potential AWS economics; it is not as direct as AWS CAF Platform perspective for the actual requirement to establish technical foundations for hosting and building cloud workloads.

AWS Prescriptive Guidance addresses the separate need to find practical AWS migration patterns and implementation guidance because prescriptive Guidance provides proven strategies and technical patterns for cloud adoption; it is not as direct as AWS CAF Platform perspective for the actual requirement to establish technical foundations for hosting and building cloud workloads.

Retain addresses the separate need to leave a selected workload in its current environment for the time being because retention is appropriate when migration is not yet justified or allowed; it is not as direct as AWS CAF Platform perspective for the actual requirement to establish technical foundations for hosting and building cloud workloads.

Loose coupling is intended to allow application components to fail or scale with less direct dependency on each other because queues and asynchronous communication can decouple component lifecycles; in this design the new outcome is to revisit resource choices as application demand evolves, which calls for Continuous performance tuning rather than Loose coupling or the earlier Automate recovery.

Automate recovery primarily supports the earlier need to restore normal application behavior without waiting for routine manual intervention because automated detection and recovery reduce the time needed to handle predictable failure conditions, but the new task is to revisit resource choices as application demand evolves; that is why Continuous performance tuning is preferable here.

Vertical scaling is intended to increase the capacity of an existing compute resource because vertical scaling changes the size or power of one instance or server; in this design the new outcome is to revisit resource choices as application demand evolves, which calls for Continuous performance tuning rather than Vertical scaling or the earlier Automate recovery.

Faster time to market is intended to release a customer-facing capability with less infrastructure lead time because on-demand delivery of infrastructure helps shorten build and launch cycles; in this design the new outcome is to benefit from provider-managed shared infrastructure without operating a dedicated facility, which calls for Resource pooling rather than Faster time to market or the earlier Self-service provisioning.

Self-service provisioning primarily supports the earlier need to create an environment without waiting for physical equipment installation because authorized teams can provision cloud resources through APIs or a console when they are needed, but the new task is to benefit from provider-managed shared infrastructure without operating a dedicated facility; that is why Resource pooling is preferable here.

Reduced undifferentiated heavy lifting is intended to spend less staff effort maintaining generic infrastructure components because managed AWS services take over selected operational tasks such as platform maintenance; in this design the new outcome is to benefit from provider-managed shared infrastructure without operating a dedicated facility, which calls for Resource pooling rather than Reduced undifferentiated heavy lifting or the earlier Self-service provisioning.

AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) is intended to move or replicate database data to a supported target because AWS DMS supports migration and ongoing replication for suitable database engines; in this design the new outcome is to move an application to cloud infrastructure with minimal redesign, which calls for Rehost (lift and shift) rather than AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) or the earlier Replatform.

Refactor or re-architect is intended to modify an application to exploit cloud-native capabilities more substantially because refactoring changes design or code to gain capabilities such as managed services or elastic components; in this design the new outcome is to move an application to cloud infrastructure with minimal redesign, which calls for Rehost (lift and shift) rather than Refactor or re-architect or the earlier Replatform.

Replatform primarily supports the earlier need to make limited optimizations during migration without fully redesigning the application because replatforming may replace a self-managed database with a managed service while preserving most application logic, but the new task is to move an application to cloud infrastructure with minimal redesign; that is why Rehost (lift and shift) is preferable here.

That description belongs to Resource-efficient software because reducing wasted computation contributes to performance and sustainability objectives; it is used to avoid unnecessary processing and storage when delivering the same output, not to explain how Cost optimization pillar provides the function to avoid unnecessary expenditure while achieving business outcomes.

That description belongs to Operational excellence pillar because operational excellence focuses on delivering business value through effective operations and continuous learning; it is used to improve how teams operate, monitor and continually refine workloads, not to explain how Cost optimization pillar provides the function to avoid unnecessary expenditure while achieving business outcomes.

That description belongs to Multi-AZ redundancy because deploying suitable redundant resources in multiple AZs isolates many facility-level failures; it is used to avoid tying service availability to one Availability Zone, not to explain how Cost optimization pillar provides the function to avoid unnecessary expenditure while achieving business outcomes.

AWS CAF Business perspective is intended to connect cloud adoption to business outcomes and investment decisions because the Business perspective aligns cloud initiatives with strategy, value and commercial priorities; in this design the new outcome is to establish technical foundations for hosting and building cloud workloads, which calls for AWS CAF Platform perspective rather than AWS CAF Business perspective or the earlier AWS Cloud Adoption Framework (AWS CAF).

AWS Cloud Adoption Framework (AWS CAF) primarily supports the earlier need to structure the organizational changes needed for cloud adoption because AWS CAF organizes transformation capabilities into Business, People, Governance, Platform, Security and Operations perspectives, but the new task is to establish technical foundations for hosting and building cloud workloads; that is why AWS CAF Platform perspective is preferable here.

AWS CAF Operations perspective is intended to prepare support, monitoring and service operations for migrated workloads because the Operations perspective develops capabilities for operating workloads effectively; in this design the new outcome is to establish technical foundations for hosting and building cloud workloads, which calls for AWS CAF Platform perspective rather than AWS CAF Operations perspective or the earlier AWS Cloud Adoption Framework (AWS CAF).

Right-sized architecture is intended to match provisioned resources to measured workload requirements because right sizing avoids both excess capacity and insufficient capacity for expected service levels; in this design the new outcome is to spread work across additional independent resources, which calls for Horizontal scaling rather than Right-sized architecture or the earlier Vertical scaling.

Vertical scaling primarily supports the earlier need to increase the capacity of an existing compute resource because vertical scaling changes the size or power of one instance or server, but the new task is to spread work across additional independent resources; that is why Horizontal scaling is preferable here.

Performance efficiency pillar is intended to select and adapt resources to meet performance needs efficiently because performance efficiency includes choosing suitable technologies and maintaining efficient resource use as demand changes; in this design the new outcome is to spread work across additional independent resources, which calls for Horizontal scaling rather than Performance efficiency pillar or the earlier Vertical scaling.

AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) is intended to move or replicate database data to a supported target because AWS DMS supports migration and ongoing replication for suitable database engines; in this design the new outcome is to develop a data-informed financial business case for migration, which calls for Migration Evaluator rather than AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) or the earlier AWS CAF Business perspective.

AWS Schema Conversion Tool (AWS SCT) is intended to convert database schema and code for a heterogeneous database migration because AWS SCT helps transform schema objects and certain database code between supported engines; in this design the new outcome is to develop a data-informed financial business case for migration, which calls for Migration Evaluator rather than AWS Schema Conversion Tool (AWS SCT) or the earlier AWS CAF Business perspective.

AWS CAF Business perspective primarily supports the earlier need to connect cloud adoption to business outcomes and investment decisions because the Business perspective aligns cloud initiatives with strategy, value and commercial priorities, but the new task is to develop a data-informed financial business case for migration; that is why Migration Evaluator is preferable here.

That description belongs to AWS Migration Hub because migration Hub helps provide visibility across a portfolio's migration activity; it is used to track migration progress across applications and migration tools, not to explain how Migration dependency mapping provides the function to identify which applications and infrastructure components rely on one another.

That description belongs to Rehost (lift and shift) because rehosting relocates a workload while largely preserving its existing architecture; it is used to move an application to cloud infrastructure with minimal redesign, not to explain how Migration dependency mapping provides the function to identify which applications and infrastructure components rely on one another.

That description belongs to AWS Cloud Adoption Framework (AWS CAF) because AWS CAF organizes transformation capabilities into Business, People, Governance, Platform, Security and Operations perspectives; it is used to structure the organizational changes needed for cloud adoption, not to explain how Migration dependency mapping provides the function to identify which applications and infrastructure components rely on one another.

Performance efficiency pillar primarily supports the earlier need to select and adapt resources to meet performance needs efficiently because performance efficiency includes choosing suitable technologies and maintaining efficient resource use as demand changes, but the new task is to match provisioned resources to measured workload requirements; that is why Right-sized architecture is preferable here.

Experiment-driven performance choices is intended to benchmark workload alternatives before standardizing a configuration because measurement of actual application behavior supports appropriate performance trade-offs; in this design the new outcome is to match provisioned resources to measured workload requirements, which calls for Right-sized architecture rather than Experiment-driven performance choices or the earlier Performance efficiency pillar.

Horizontal scaling is intended to spread work across additional independent resources because horizontal scaling increases the number of workers or instances serving a workload; in this design the new outcome is to match provisioned resources to measured workload requirements, which calls for Right-sized architecture rather than Horizontal scaling or the earlier Performance efficiency pillar.