Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

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

Salesforce Exam MuleSoft Integration Architect I Topic 9 Question 15 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's MuleSoft Integration Architect I exam
Question #: 15
Topic #: 9
[All MuleSoft Integration Architect I Questions]

A retail company is implementing a MuleSoft API to get inventory details from two vendors by Invoking each vendor's online applications. Due to network issues, the invocations to the vendor applications are timing out intermittently, but the requests are successful after re-invoking each

What is the most performant way of implementing the API to invoke each vendor application and to retry invocations that generate timeout errors?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Grover at Sep 17, 2024, 04:43 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium MuleSoft Integration Architect I Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Jenise
2 months ago
I'd have to go with Option B. It's a classic choice, just like choosing between Coke and Pepsi. And it's the most straightforward, just like my sense of humor. Seriously though, it looks like the best fit for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
Margery
25 days ago
Definitely, Option B is like the tried and true method for handling these kinds of issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Malcom
26 days ago
Yeah, Option B is like the safe bet here. It covers all the bases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Izetta
28 days ago
I agree, Option B seems like the most logical choice for this situation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Selma
1 months ago
Option B sounds like the way to go. It keeps things simple and organized.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Colene
2 months ago
Option A with the For-Each scope inside an Until-Successful scope sounds good, but I wonder if it might be a bit slower than the parallel approaches in Options B and C. Guess it depends on the vendor response times and the network conditions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mattie
2 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about the Round-Robin scope in Option D. Seems a bit overkill for this use case. I'd go with Option B or C, as they seem more appropriate for the given requirements.
upvoted 0 times
Huey
1 months ago
Option C also seems like a good option, using a Scatter-Gather scope to invoke each vendor application.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paulina
1 months ago
I think Option B is a good choice, it allows for invoking each vendor application on a separate route.
upvoted 0 times
...
Zana
2 months ago
I agree, Option D does seem like overkill. Option B or C would be more suitable.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ernie
2 months ago
That's a good point, but I still think option A is more reliable for retrying timeouts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hana
2 months ago
I disagree, I believe option C is more performant as it uses Scatter-Gather to invoke vendors in parallel.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ernie
2 months ago
I think option A is the best choice because it invokes the vendors in series and retries timeouts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerlene
3 months ago
I like the idea of using a Scatter-Gather scope in Option C. That way, we can leverage parallel processing to improve the overall performance. The Until-Successful scope should also ensure that the requests are retried properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alyce
3 months ago
Option B seems like the most straightforward solution. Using a Choice scope to invoke the vendors separately and an Until-Successful scope to handle the timeout errors should provide a robust and scalable implementation.
upvoted 0 times
Socorro
2 months ago
It's a simple and effective way to ensure the API handles network issues smoothly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jennie
2 months ago
Using the Choice scope for vendors and Until-Successful for timeouts is a smart approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Florinda
2 months ago
I agree, having separate routes for each vendor makes it easier to manage.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elsa
2 months ago
Option B sounds good. It separates the vendors and handles timeouts well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brittni
2 months ago
I agree, Option B sounds like a good approach. Separating the vendor invocations and handling timeouts with an Until-Successful scope seems efficient.
upvoted 0 times
...
Titus
3 months ago
Option B seems like the most straightforward solution. Using a Choice scope to invoke the vendors separately and an Until-Successful scope to handle the timeout errors should provide a robust and scalable implementation.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel