A company used an Amazon RDS for MySQL DB instance for application testing and created two backups before terminating the instance: a database dump using mysqldump, and a final DB snapshot created on RDS termination. The company plans a new test cycle and wants to create a new DB instance on a MySQL-compatible edition of Amazon Aurora from the most recent backup. Which solutions will create the new DB instance? (Choose two.)

The two correct solutions leverage native AWS capabilities for migrating data. "Import the RDS snapshot directly into Aurora" is correct because Amazon Aurora for MySQL is compatible with Amazon RDS for MySQL snapshots. You can restore an RDS for MySQL DB snapshot directly into an Aurora MySQL DB cluster. "Upload the database dump to Amazon S3. Then import the database dump into Aurora" is correct because Aurora MySQL supports importing data directly from files stored in an Amazon S3 bucket. This method is suitable for logical backups like those created by mysqldump. "Upload the RDS snapshot to Amazon S3. Then import the RDS snapshot into Aurora" is incorrect because RDS snapshots cannot be directly imported from S3 into Aurora; they are restored directly within the RDS/Aurora service. "Use AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to import the RDS snapshot into Aurora" is incorrect because AWS DMS is used for ongoing replication or one-time migrations of live databases, not for importing snapshots. "Upload the database dump to Amazon S3. Then use AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to import the database dump into Aurora" is incorrect because while DMS can use S3 as a source, it's typically for data in a specific format (e.g., CSV) for ongoing changes, not for restoring a full mysqldump file directly as a new database instance. The native S3 import feature for Aurora is more direct for this use case.