A company must implement disaster recovery for a critical app that currently runs in a single AWS Region. The web frontend uses EC2 instances behind an Application Load Balancer (ALB). The app writes to an Amazon RDS for MySQL DB instance and outputs processed documents to an Amazon S3 bucket. The finance team runs direct queries against the database to produce reports; during peak times these queries consume DB resources and degrade application performance. Design a disaster-recovery solution that minimizes data loss and eliminates the performance impact of the finance team's queries. Which solution satisfies these requirements?

The correct solution uses an RDS cross-Region read replica for disaster recovery and offloads reporting queries, minimizing data loss and eliminating performance impact. Creating AMIs and copying them to another Region allows for quick EC2 instance deployment during a disaster. S3 Cross-Region Replication (CRR) ensures S3 data is available in the DR Region. Promoting the read replica to a standalone DB instance provides a writable database. Incorrect options: Migrating to DynamoDB is a significant architectural change, not just a DR solution, and DynamoDB Global Tables are for multi-Region active-active, not a simple DR for an existing MySQL app. Launching additional EC2 instances in a separate Region and adding them to an ALB implies an active-active setup, which is more complex and costly than required for DR with minimal data loss. Hourly snapshots for RDS would lead to significant data loss (up to an hour) compared to a read replica, which offers much lower RPO. ElastiCache reduces query load but doesn't solve the DR requirement for the database itself.