Independence Day Deal! Unlock 25% OFF Today – Limited-Time Offer - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location PL
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Cisco Exam 350-901 Topic 7 Question 54 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 350-901 exam
Question #: 54
Topic #: 7
[All 350-901 Questions]

Refer to the exhibit.

This snippet of a script has recently started exiting abnormally with an exception stating ''Unexpected HTTP Response code: 429''.

Which solution handles rate limiting by the remote API?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Dierdre at Apr 26, 2023, 05:52 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 350-901 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Virgilio
2 months ago
Option B all the way. Retry with a specific delay is the API's way of saying 'Chill out, dude. I need a breather.'
upvoted 0 times
Chau
13 days ago
I've had success with Option D in the past. It's worth considering as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leah
17 days ago
I think Option C might also work, it could help manage the rate limiting more efficiently.
upvoted 0 times
...
Veronika
1 months ago
I agree, Option B is the way to go. It gives the API some time to recover.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Rupert
2 months ago
I'm not sure what 'backoff' means, but Option B seems the most straightforward solution. This 'unexpected HTTP 429' error is really starting to bug me!
upvoted 0 times
Leonida
12 days ago
User1: Yeah, that HTTP 429 error can be really annoying.
upvoted 0 times
...
Keneth
13 days ago
User2: I agree, Option B seems like the most straightforward solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Loren
1 months ago
User1: Option B is the way to go for handling rate limiting.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Colene
2 months ago
Option C with the 'backoff' strategy seems like a good approach too. Gradually increasing the delay between retries is a sensible way to deal with rate limiting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Joseph
2 months ago
The 'retry_after' parameter in Option B looks like the best way to handle the rate limiting issue. It allows the script to gracefully wait and try again after the specified time.
upvoted 0 times
Alysa
4 days ago
Let's go with Option B then, it seems like the most reliable solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annice
9 days ago
I agree, Option B seems more efficient with the wait and retry approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Scarlet
10 days ago
But Option A also seems like it could work if we handle the rate limiting properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melodie
16 days ago
I think Option B with the 'retry_after' parameter is the best solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Major
17 days ago
User4: Option B seems like the way to go to prevent the script from exiting abnormally.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billy
19 days ago
User3: I agree, it's important to have a graceful way to wait and retry after hitting the limit.
upvoted 0 times
...
Isadora
23 days ago
User2: Yeah, that parameter would help the script handle the rate limiting more effectively.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eileen
2 months ago
User1: I think Option B with the 'retry_after' parameter is the best solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Eva
3 months ago
Hmm, that's a good point. I'll reconsider my choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Garry
3 months ago
I disagree, I believe Option D is the best solution because it provides a more robust approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eva
3 months ago
I think the solution for rate limiting is Option C.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77