The correct option is Define StorageClasses and request them with PersistentVolumeClaims.

Define StorageClasses and request them with PersistentVolumeClaims lets you create distinct storage tiers and lets applications request the exact tier they need by creating a PersistentVolumeClaim that references a StorageClass.

Using StorageClasses enables dynamic provisioning so the control plane will create volumes on the chosen backend when a matching PersistentVolumeClaim is submitted. You can encode performance characteristics and features as parameters in each StorageClass and control binding behavior and reclaim policy without coupling pods to specific nodes.

Filestore is not correct because it names a specific storage product and not the Kubernetes mechanism for selecting storage tiers. You could use Filestore as a backend but it does not answer how to instruct Kubernetes to pair workloads with different storage classes.

Develop a custom scheduler that is aware of storage characteristics is not the right choice because scheduling pods to nodes is separate from volume provisioning and binding. Kubernetes already provides StorageClasses and the volume controller for allocation so a custom scheduler is unnecessary and overly complex for this requirement.

Label nodes and use nodeSelector in Pod specifications to target nodes with the proper storage is not ideal because it couples workloads to particular nodes and it does not leverage dynamic provisioning. Node labels can work for node local disks but they do not provide a portable or scalable way to request different managed storage tiers across environments.

Full AWS Practitioner Certification Question