Study SAP-C02 New Architecture for Existing Workloads: key concepts, common traps, and exam decision cues.
Migration does not end at transport. SAP-C02 also asks what the workload should look like once it lands. Strong answers choose the right target runtime and data platform based on control needs, ops burden, workload shape, and long-term fit.
| Need | Strongest first fit | Why |
|---|---|---|
| full OS control or legacy host dependency | EC2 | maximum control, highest ops burden |
| app platform with less infrastructure management | Elastic Beanstalk or another managed platform | faster adoption with less host work |
| containerized application model | ECS, EKS, or Fargate | container boundary is the main design factor |
| object, shared file, or block storage fit | S3, EFS, FSx, or EBS | storage semantics matter |
| managed relational or purpose-built database target | RDS, DynamoDB, OpenSearch, or another fit-for-pattern store | data access pattern should drive the target |
| Trap | Better rule |
|---|---|
| rehosting to EC2 by default even when managed platforms fit | the best target often lowers future ops work |
| choosing a container orchestrator because containers exist | orchestration complexity should match the real need |
| keeping the old database model because it is familiar | migrated workloads can benefit from a better-fit managed data service |
| picking storage by habit | block, object, and shared-file patterns solve different problems |
Target-architecture questions usually ask what the workload really needs after migration. If it needs full OS control, keep it on EC2. If it can stay containerized without server-fleet ownership, think managed container hosting like Fargate. Then match storage and database targets to the long-term operating model instead of copying every legacy choice forward unchanged.