A retail company uses Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL to process and store live transactional data.

The goal is to archive historical data from an Amazon Redshift data warehouse while combining live transactional data from Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL with current and historical data in a cost-efficient manner. The company wants to keep only the last 15 months of data in Redshift to reduce costs.

Option A: "Configure the Amazon Redshift Federated Query feature to query live transactional data that is in the PostgreSQL database."Redshift Federated Query allows querying live transactional data directly from Aurora PostgreSQL without having to move it into Redshift, thereby enabling seamless integration of the current data in Redshift and live data in PostgreSQL. This is a cost-effective approach, as it avoids unnecessary data duplication.

Option C: "Schedule a monthly job to copy data that is older than 15 months to Amazon S3 by using the UNLOAD command. Delete the old data from the Redshift cluster. Configure Amazon Redshift Spectrum to access historical data in Amazon S3."This option uses Amazon Redshift Spectrum, which enables Redshift to query data directly in S3 without moving it into Redshift. By unloading older data (older than 15 months) to S3, and then using Spectrum to access it, this approach reduces storage costs significantly while still allowing the data to be queried when necessary.

Option B (Redshift Spectrum for live PostgreSQL data) is not applicable, as Redshift Spectrum is intended for querying data in Amazon S3, not live transactional data in Aurora.

Option D (S3 Glacier Flexible Retrieval) is not suitable because Glacier is designed for long-term archival storage with infrequent access, and querying data in Glacier for analytics purposes would incur higher retrieval times and costs.

Option E (materialized views) would not meet the need to archive data or combine it from multiple sources; it is best suited for combining frequently accessed data already in Redshift.