A social media company collects and processes data and currently stores it on on-premises NFS storage that cannot scale fast enough. The company wants to migrate the data store to AWS in the MOST cost-effective way. Which solution meets these requirements?

The correct solution is to set up an AWS Storage Gateway Amazon S3 File Gateway and use an Amazon S3 Lifecycle policy. An S3 File Gateway provides a file interface (NFS and SMB) to Amazon S3, allowing the company to migrate their existing NFS data to S3. This is highly scalable and cost-effective because S3 offers various storage classes (like S3 Standard-IA, S3 Glacier) that are cheaper for less frequently accessed data. Lifecycle policies automate the transition of data between these classes, optimizing costs. The other options are less suitable. AWS Storage Gateway Volume Gateway is block-based storage, not file-based, making it incompatible with the existing NFS data without significant re-architecture. Amazon EFS is a fully managed NFS file system, but it is generally more expensive than S3 for large-scale, infrequently accessed data, especially when considering the cost-effectiveness requirement. EFS Standard-Infrequent Access and One Zone-Infrequent Access are still EFS, and while they offer cost savings within EFS, they don't match the cost-effectiveness of S3 with lifecycle policies for this use case.