People always tend to neglect the great power of accumulation, thus the MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance study materials can not only benefit one’s learning process but also help people develop a good habit of preventing delays. We have full confidence to ensure that you will have an enjoyable study experience with our MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance Study Materials, which are designed to arouse your interest and help you pass the exam more easily. You will have a better understanding after reading the following advantages.
MuleSoft is a leading provider of integration software solutions for businesses of all sizes. The company offers a range of products and services that enable organizations to connect data, applications, and devices across their entire IT infrastructure. To ensure that professionals working with MuleSoft products have the necessary skills and expertise, the company offers a certification program that includes the MuleSoft MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance exam.
The MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance exam focuses on assessing an individual's ability to perform maintenance tasks on the Anypoint Platform. This includes tasks such as upgrading the platform, managing security, troubleshooting issues, and ensuring high availability. MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance exam is designed to ensure that certified architects maintain their expertise and stay up to date with the latest updates and best practices.
>> Detailed MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance Study Plan <<
Everybody wants success, but not everyone has a strong mind to persevere in study. If you feel unsatisfied with your present status, our MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance actual exam can help you out. Our products always boast a pass rate as high as 99%. Using our MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance study materials can also save your time in the exam preparation. If you choose our MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance Practice Engine, you are going to get the certification easily. Just make your choice and purchase our MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance training quiz and start your study now!
NEW QUESTION # 25
A system API has a guaranteed SLA of 100 ms per request. The system API is deployed to a primary environment as well as to a disaster recovery (DR) environment, with different DNS names in each environment. An upstream process API invokes the system API and the main goal of this process API is to respond to client requests in the least possible time. In what order should the system APIs be invoked, and what changes should be made in order to speed up the response time for requests from the process API?
Answer: A
Explanation:
In parallel, invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment and the system API deployed to the DR environment, and ONLY use the first response.
*****************************************
>> The API requirement in the given scenario is to respond in least possible time.
>> The option that is suggesting to first try the API in primary environment and then fallback to API in DR environment would result in successful response but NOT in least possible time. So, this is NOT a right choice of implementation for given requirement.
>> Another option that is suggesting to ONLY invoke API in primary environment and to add timeout and retries may also result in successful response upon retries but NOT in least possible time. So, this is also NOT a right choice of implementation for given requirement.
>> One more option that is suggesting to invoke API in primary environment and API in DR environment in parallel using Scatter-Gather would result in wrong API response as it would return merged results and moreover, Scatter-Gather does things in parallel which is true but still completes its scope only on finishing all routes inside it. So again, NOT a right choice of implementation for given requirement The Correct choice is to invoke the API in primary environment and the API in DR environment parallelly, and using ONLY the first response received from one of them.
NEW QUESTION # 26
An API implementation is deployed to CloudHub.
What conditions can be alerted on using the default Anypoint Platform functionality, where the alert conditions depend on the end-to-end request processing of the API implementation?
Answer: A
Explanation:
When the response time of API invocations exceeds a threshold
*****************************************
>> Alerts can be setup for all the given options using the default Anypoint Platform functionality
>> However, the question insists on an alert whose conditions depend on the end-to-end request processing of the API implementation.
>> Alert w.r.t "Response Times" is the only one which requires end-to-end request processing of API implementation in order to determine if the threshold is exceeded or not.
NEW QUESTION # 27
Version 3.0.1 of a REST API implementation represents time values in PST time using ISO 8601 hh:mm:ss format. The API implementation needs to be changed to instead represent time values in CEST time using ISO
8601 hh:mm:ss format. When following the semver.org semantic versioning specification, what version should be assigned to the updated API implementation?
Answer: D
Explanation:
4.0.0
*****************************************
As per semver.org semantic versioning specification:
Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
- MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes.
- MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards compatible manner.
- PATCH version when you make backwards compatible bug fixes.
As per the scenario given in the question, the API implementation is completely changing its behavior.
Although the format of the time is still being maintained as hh:mm:ss and there is no change in schema w.r.t format, the API will start functioning different after this change as the times are going to come completely different.
Example: Before the change, say, time is going as 09:00:00 representing the PST. Now on, after the change, the same time will go as 18:00:00 as Central European Summer Time is 9 hours ahead of Pacific Time.
>> This may lead to some uncertain behavior on API clients depending on how they are handling the times in the API response. All the API clients need to be informed that the API functionality is going to change and will return in CEST format. So, this considered as a MAJOR change and the version of API for this new change would be 4.0.0
NEW QUESTION # 28
Say, there is a legacy CRM system called CRM-Z which is offering below functions:
1. Customer creation
2. Amend details of an existing customer
3. Retrieve details of a customer
4. Suspend a customer
Answer: C
Explanation:
Implement different system APIs named createCustomer, amendCustomer, retrieveCustomer
and suspendCustomer as they are modular and has seperation of concerns
*****************************************
>> It is quite normal to have a single API and different Verb + Resource combinations. However, this fits well for an Experience API or a Process API but not a best architecture style for System APIs. So, option with just one customerManagement API is not the best choice here.
>> The option with APIs in createCustomerInCRMZ format is next close choice w.r.t modularization and less maintenance but the naming of APIs is directly coupled with the legacy system. A better foreseen approach would be to name your APIs by abstracting the backend system names as it allows seamless replacement/migration of any backend system anytime. So, this is not the correct choice too.
>> createCustomer, amendCustomer, retrieveCustomer and suspendCustomer is the right approach and is the best fit compared to other options as they are both modular and same time got the names decoupled from backend system and it has covered all requirements a System API needs.
NEW QUESTION # 29
A system API is deployed to a primary environment as well as to a disaster recovery (DR) environment, with different DNS names in each environment. A process API is a client to the system API and is being rate limited by the system API, with different limits in each of the environments. The system API's DR environment provides only 20% of the rate limiting offered by the primary environment. What is the best API fault-tolerant invocation strategy to reduce overall errors in the process API, given these conditions and constraints?
Answer: D
Explanation:
Invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment; add timeout and retry logic to the process API to avoid intermittent failures; if it still fails, invoke the system API deployed to the DR environment
*****************************************
There is one important consideration to be noted in the question which is - System API in DR environment provides only 20% of the rate limiting offered by the primary environment. So, comparitively, very less calls will be allowed into the DR environment API opposed to its primary environment. With this in mind, lets analyse what is the right and best fault-tolerant invocation strategy.
1. Invoking both the system APIs in parallel is definitely NOT a feasible approach because of the 20% limitation we have on DR environment. Calling in parallel every time would easily and quickly exhaust the rate limits on DR environment and may not give chance to genuine intermittent error scenarios to let in during the time of need.
2. Another option given is suggesting to add timeout and retry logic to process API while invoking primary environment's system API. This is good so far. However, when all retries failed, the option is suggesting to invoke the copy of process API on DR environment which is not right or recommended. Only system API is the one to be considered for fallback and not the whole process API. Process APIs usually have lot of heavy orchestration calling many other APIs which we do not want to repeat again by calling DR's process API. So this option is NOT right.
3. One more option given is suggesting to add the retry (no timeout) logic to process API to directly retry on DR environment's system API instead of retrying the primary environment system API first. This is not at all a proper fallback. A proper fallback should occur only after all retries are performed and exhausted on Primary environment first. But here, the option is suggesting to directly retry fallback API on first failure itself without trying main API. So, this option is NOT right too.
This leaves us one option which is right and best fit.
- Invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment
- Add Timeout and Retry logic on it in process API
- If it fails even after all retries, then invoke the system API deployed to the DR environment.
NEW QUESTION # 30
......
To cope with the fast growing market, we will always keep advancing and offer our clients the most refined technical expertise and excellent services about our MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance exam questions. In the meantime, all your legal rights will be guaranteed after buying our MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance Study Materials. For many years, we have always put our customers in top priority. Not only we offer the best MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance training prep, but also our sincere and considerate attitude is praised by numerous of our customers.
MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance Dumps Vce: https://www.testkingpdf.com/MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance-testking-pdf-torrent.html
