Online Access Free Integration-Architecture-Designer Exam Questions

No.# C. What latency is acceptable for orders to reach the fulfillment system?

D. Can the fulfillment system participate in idempotent design to avoid duplicate orders?
C &D are correct as per explanation shared in trailing comment.

No.# When designing an integration to send orders from Salesforce to a fulfillment system, an Integration Architect must carefully consider the constraints of both systems involved. Here are two critical system constraint questions to evaluate:
Can the fulfillment system participate in idempotent design to avoid duplicate orders?
Reasoning: Orders are a critical business transaction. If the integration fails mid-way (e.g., due to network issues or temporary system unavailability) and needs to retry sending the order, the fulfillment system must be able to handle receiving the same order multiple times without processing it more than once. Idempotency ensures that performing an operation multiple times has the same effect as performing it once.
Impact: If the fulfillment system is not designed to be idempotent, retries could lead to duplicate orders, incorrect inventory deductions, double billing, and significant operational errors. The integration design must account for this, either by ensuring the fulfillment system's capabilities or by implementing a mechanism in the integration layer (e.g., using a unique transaction ID and checking the status before resending).
What latency is acceptable for orders to reach the fulfillment system?
Reasoning: The acceptable delay or latency for an order to be transmitted from Salesforce to the fulfillment system directly impacts the choice of integration pattern.
Impact:
Real-time (low latency): If orders need to be fulfilled immediately (e.g., digital goods), a synchronous integration pattern like Request & Reply might be necessary, potentially using a middleware or Apex continuations to manage long-running responses if the fulfillment system is slow.
Near real-time / Asynchronous (moderate latency): If a short delay is acceptable (e.g., a few seconds to minutes), an asynchronous pattern like publishing Platform Events or using Outbound Messaging might be suitable. These patterns decouple Salesforce from the fulfillment system, impr...

No.# D. Remote Invocation initiated by Middleware
The question says "as quickly as possible" Outbound Message is Async & fire and forget pattern

No.# B C D

No.# A - Outbound message does not support named credentials
D - does not make sense in this case. ( when the status changes to "Confirmed)

B - Correct (Explanation below)
C - Correct (Explanation below)

Named credentials are supported in these types of callout definitions:

- Apex callouts
- External data sources of these types:
Salesforce Connect: OData 2.0
Salesforce Connect: OData 4.0
Salesforce Connect: Custom (developed with the Apex Connector Framework)
- External Services

https://help.salesforce.com/s/articleView?id=sf.named_credentials_about.htm&type=5

No.# A B E is right

No.# D

To address the performance and API limit issues, an architect should recommend switching from polling the SOAP API to using Salesforce's Streaming API for real-time case updates. Specifically, implementing a push topic on the Case object and having the application subscribe to it will allow the application to receive notifications only when new cases are created, eliminating the need for frequent polling

No.# B

To implement robust error handling and retry logic for Batch Apex jobs, utilize the BatchApexErrorEvent platform event and its associated trigger. This allows you to capture errors that occur during batch execution, log them, and implement retry mechanisms without modifying the original batch class.

No.# C is answer

in real Exam option D will not be there

No.# https://www.freecram.net/question/Salesforce.Integration-Architect.v2023-11-24.q51/a-large-consumer-goods-manufacturer-operating-in-multiple-countries-isplanning-to-implement-salesforce

No.# Change Data Capture (CDC)

No.# A C

Configure Login IP Ranges on user profiles and
Enable the "Lock sessions to the IP address from which they originated" setting.

This ensures that only users with IP addresses within the defined range can log in, and their sessions are tied to that specific IP address.

Here's why these are the best choices:

Login IP Ranges:
This feature allows administrators to specify a list of allowed IP addresses or ranges for each user profile. Users attempting to log in from outside these ranges will be denied access.

Lock sessions to the IP address:
When enabled, this setting prevents users from accessing Salesforce if their IP address changes during a session. This helps prevent session hijacking and unauthorized access from different locations.

The other options are not as effective:

Using a login flow to validate the IP and request a 2nd factor:

While a login flow can add an extra layer of security, it doesn't inherently restrict access to a specific network. It's a good practice for MFA but doesn't address the core requirement of network-based access control.

Using a trigger to change the user's profile based on IP:

Triggers in Salesforce are designed to handle data changes, not network-level access control. They are not suitable for enforcing IP restrictions....

No.# B

The main limitation of outbound messages that might be problematic in this scenario is that they can only send data for one object at a time. Since the requirement is to send both Opportunity and Opportunity Line Item data to the ERP system, this limitation would require multiple outbound messages or a different integration solution.

No.# B

Keyword in question is 'monitor the integration'

Platform Events have a limit on the number of events that can be published or delivered per hour, depending on the edition and license type. If this limit is exceeded, the trigger on the Platform Events may fail or be delayed.

Option A is not correct because debug logs for Platform Event triggers are not useful for monitoring performance. Debug logs are used for troubleshooting issues or errors in the trigger logic, not for measuring the throughput or latency of the events.

No.# B

latest CDC is cool does the job

No.# C

Two-way SSL (Mutual TLS) is a widely accepted security mechanism for securing API integrations with external systems, especially when integrating with Microsoft Azure API Gateway or other cloud services.

Mutual authentication ensures that both Salesforce and the external API Gateway verify each other’s identities before allowing data exchange.
CA-signed certificates provide additional security by ensuring that only authorized entities communicate with the API Gateway.

Why NOT D?

OAuth is great for authentication and token-based access but does not provide the same level of security as mutual TLS (mTLS) for API-to-API communications.
OAuth would be more relevant for user-level authentication, while mTLS is better for securing system-level API calls.

Also, The way the question is formulate is ambiguous but based on "an integration with an external Microsoft Azure API Gateway" it reads this is for outbound flows - SF to API GW in which case Connected App is not applicable.

No.# Ask is Declarative option.

C

Never-mind, your answers are enough for me to pass Integration-Architecture-Designer

I have bought the Integration-Architecture-Designer online test engine, i think it is good to simulate the actual test. From the customizable test, i knew about my weakness and strenght about the Integration-Architecture-Designer, so i can have a clear study plan. So lucky, i pass with 95%.

No.# C, D are correct