Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Salesforce Exam ARC-101 Topic 7 Question 15 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's ARC-101 exam
Question #: 15
Topic #: 7
[All ARC-101 Questions]

An enterprise architect has requested the Salesforce Integration architect to review the following (see diagram & description) and provide recommendations after carefully considering all constraints of the enterprise systems and Salesforce platform limits.

* About 3,000 phone sales agents use a Salesforce Lightning UI concurrently to check eligibility of a customer for a qualifying offer.

* There are multiple eligibility systems that provides this service and are hosted externally. However, their current response times could take up to 90 seconds to process and return (there are discussions to reduce the response times in future, but no commitments are made).

* These eligibility systems can be accessed through APIs orchestrated via ESB (MuleSoft).

* All requests from Salesforce will have to traverse through customer's API Gateway layer and the API Gateway imposes a constraint of timing out requests after 9 seconds.

Which three recommendations should be made?

Choose 3 answers

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A, C, D

Contribute your Thoughts:

Dean
18 days ago
B is not a good recommendation since making 3,000 concurrent callouts to external systems could overwhelm the API Gateway. D seems overly complex for this use case.
upvoted 0 times
Tammi
4 days ago
A) ESB (Mule) with cache/state management to return a requestID (or) Tammi if available from external system.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Gladys
22 days ago
A, C, and E seem like the most reasonable options to address the constraints and requirements. Using the ESB with caching and continuation callouts should help avoid the API Gateway timeout issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tracey
26 days ago
I'm not sure about option A, I think option B might be a better choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashton
28 days ago
I agree with Vanna, option A seems like a feasible solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vanna
1 months ago
I think option A sounds like a good recommendation.
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