A company is hosting a three-tier ecommerce application in the AWS Cloud.

 This option is the most efficient because it uses Amazon CloudFront, which is a web service that speeds up distribution of your static and dynamic web content, such as .html, .css, .js, and image files, to your users1. It also uses a CloudFront distribution for the static content, which reduces the load on the EC2 instances and improves the performance and availability of the website. It also uses an Auto Scaling group to launchnew instances based on network traffic, which automatically adjusts the compute capacity of your EC2 instances based on load or aschedule2. This solution meets the requirement of ensuring that all the requests are processed successfully during events for the launch of new products. Option A is less efficient because it uses a CloudFront distribution for the dynamic content, which is not necessary as the dynamic content is already handled by the API on the EC2 instances. It also increases the number of EC2 instances to handle the increase in traffic, which could incur higher costs and complexity than using an Auto Scaling group. Option C is less efficient because it uses an Amazon ElastiCache instance in front of the ALB to reduce traffic for the API to handle, which is a way to provide afully managed in-memory data store service that provides sub-millisecond latency for caching and data processing3. However, this could introduce additional complexity and latency, and does not scale automatically based on network traffic. Option D is less efficient because it uses an Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) queue to receive requests from the website for later processing by the EC2 instances, which is a way to send, store, and receive messages between software components at any volume. However, this does not provide a faster response time to the users as they have to wait for their requests to be processed by the EC2 instances.