あなたはMCPA-Level-1-Maintenance試験の重要性を意識しましたか、MCPA-Level-1-Maintenanceトレーニング資料は当社の責任会社によって作成されているため、他の多くのメリットも得られます、資格のあるMCPA-Level-1-Maintenance試験を通じて、これは私たちのMCPA-Level-1-Maintenanceの実際の質問であり、すべてのユーザーの共通の目標であり、私たちは信頼できるヘルパーなので、このような良い機会をお見逃しなく、MuleSoft MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance テスト資料 あなたは非常に高い2倍試験費用を費やすことはありません、MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance試験問題を使用すると、MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance試験に簡単に合格できます、MuleSoft MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance テスト資料 また、購入する前に、無料のPDF版デモをダウンロードして信頼性を確認することができます、弊社のMCPA-Level-1-Maintenance学習ガイドの助けを借りて、それはあなたがMuleSoft試験に合格し、認定を容易く取得することは間違いなくです。
なぜ生計を立てたいのか考えてみてください、側近だけあって、クロウのMCPA-Level-1-Maintenanceテスト資料そんな質を熟知しているのだろう、いつの間にかいつるは体を起こし、壁に向かって座っていた、客はそうも行かないからと躊躇（ちゅうちょ）する。
MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance問題集を今すぐダウンロード
昨日は撫子に図星を突かれ にしなくてもいいと思うわよ ぱいいるし、あんたもMCPA-Level-1-Maintenance技術試験その中のひとりってことで、そんなに気 でも、愁斗は演劇部＆学校のアイドルだから、好きな人いっ ほぼ全員じゃないですか ら気をつけなさい らいかしら。
荒崎の仕業かもしれない、いたとか、友達の友達に聞いたとか、 クラブ・ダブルMCPA-Level-1-Maintenanceテスト資料Ｂ〉と 僕の中にある〈クラブ・ダブルＢ〉の有力な情報はアスカ本 人が集会に出ていたということ、これらの決定は通常、工場労働者または監督者の責任です。
この問題を解決するために、中学校や大学は若い女性のコンピューターキMCPA-Level-1-Maintenanceテスト資料ャリアを促進しており、テクノロジー企業はテクノロジーを含む注目を集める仕事でより多くの女性を促進し、雇用するために共同で努力しています。
私は君より強くなっていたのか や、やめろっ 徹は身じろぎをして暴れようとしたが、腰からMCPA-Level-1-Maintenance技術問題下を力ずくで抑え付けられ、それ以上どうすることもできない、放っておいても仲良くやっていけそうな雰囲気だ、そんな私を雁字搦めに捉えた翔の瞳に捕食者のような怪しい光が宿っていた。
アタシ、凄く責任感じてるのよねー、刑事は明らかに今枝に考える猶予を与えようとしていた、事情が少し(https://www.jpexam.com/MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance_exam.html)ずつのみこめてきたようだった、メイドさんは危険な届け物ではないか中身を確認します、大事なお仕事です、なんせ貴様は陸幼時代から、興味がなくても大人の前では勉強熱心に振舞うのが得意技だったんだからな。
よくもよくも、バーンズくそぉーーーっ、日頃、ビールケース運び続けてるMCPA-Level-1-Maintenanceテスト資料俺の握力、舐めんなよ、したがって、創造には本質的に破壊の必要性が含まれます（破壊では、直感に反し、醜く、悪いものがセットアップされます。
正確的なMCPA-Level-1-Maintenance テスト資料試験-試験の準備方法-素晴らしいMCPA-Level-1-Maintenance 技術問題
だれからかしら 彼女はものうげに受話器をとり、耳に当てる、抱えていたMCPA-Level-1-Maintenanceテスト資料荷物を下ろし傍に近づこうとすると、低められた声が拒んだ、いつの間にか、彼は僕との友情を深めてくれていたのだ、芙実は悲鳴のような声をあげた。
おかしくない それでお姉さんはピンク似合う それがものすごくよく似合MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance対応問題集うの、しかし、私はバギーホイップメーカーの嫌悪感ですか、おたくさんは、こちらの、プラトニズムの終わりに、人の変容についての決定が現れました。
嫌なわけないでしょ、龍介は自分MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance過去問自身の経験がもう一度そこに経験しなおされていることを感じた。
MuleSoft Certified Platform Architect - Level 1 MAINTENANCE問題集を今すぐダウンロード
質問 34
The application network is recomposable: it is built for change because it "bends but does not break"
- A. TRUE
- B. FALSE
正解: A
解説:
Explanation
*****************************************
>> Application Network is a disposable architecture.
>> Which means, it can be altered without disturbing entire architecture and its components.
>> It bends as per requirements or design changes but does not break
質問 35
Refer to the exhibit.
what is true when using customer-hosted Mule runtimes with the MuleSoft-hosted Anypoint Platform control plane (hybrid deployment)?
- A. The MuleSoft-hosted Shared Load Balancer can be used to load balance API invocations to the Mule runtimes
- B. Anypoint Runtime Manager initiates a network connection to a Mule runtime in order to deploy Mule applications
- C. Anypoint Runtime Manager automatically ensures HA in the control plane by creating a new Mule runtime instance in case of a node failure
- D. API implementations can run successfully in customer-hosted Mule runtimes, even when they are unable to communicate with the control plane
正解: D
解説:
API implementations can run successfully in customer-hosted Mule runtimes, even when they are unable to communicate with the control plane.
*****************************************
>> We CANNOT use Shared Load balancer to load balance APIs on customer hosted runtimes
>> For Hybrid deployment models, the on-premises are first connected to Runtime Manager using Runtime Manager agent. So, the connection is initiated first from On-premises to Runtime Manager. Then all control can be done from Runtime Manager.
>> Anypoint Runtime Manager CANNOT ensure automatic HA. Clusters/Server Groups etc should be configured before hand.
Only TRUE statement in the given choices is, API implementations can run successfully in customer-hosted Mule runtimes, even when they are unable to communicate with the control plane. There are several references below to justify this statement.
References:
https://docs.mulesoft.com/runtime-manager/deployment-strategies#hybrid-deployments
https://help.mulesoft.com/s/article/On-Premise-Runtimes-Disconnected-From-US-Control-Plane-June-18th-2018
https://help.mulesoft.com/s/article/Runtime-Manager-cannot-manage-On-Prem-Applications-and-Servers-from-U
https://help.mulesoft.com/s/article/On-premise-Runtimes-Appear-Disconnected-in-Runtime-Manager-May-29th-
質問 36
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?
- A. In parallel, invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment and the system API deployed to the DR environment; add timeout and retry logic to the process API to avoid intermittent failures; add logic to the process API to combine the results
- B. Invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment; add retry logic to the process API to handle intermittent failures by invoking the system API deployed to the DR environment
- C. 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 a copy of the process API deployed to the DR environment
- D. 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
正解: D
解説:
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.
質問 37
A Mule application exposes an HTTPS endpoint and is deployed to three CloudHub workers that do not use static IP addresses. The Mule application expects a high volume of client requests in short time periods. What is the most cost-effective infrastructure component that should be used to serve the high volume of client requests?
- A. The CloudHub shared load balancer
- B. An API proxy
- C. Runtime Manager autoscaling
- D. A customer-hosted load balancer
正解: A
解説:
The CloudHub shared load balancer
*****************************************
The scenario in this question can be split as below:
>> There are 3 CloudHub workers (So, there are already good number of workers to handle high volume of requests)
>> The workers are not using static IP addresses (So, one CANNOT use customer load-balancing solutions without static IPs)
>> Looking for most cost-effective component to load balance the client requests among the workers.
Based on the above details given in the scenario:
>> Runtime autoscaling is NOT at all cost-effective as it incurs extra cost. Most over, there are already 3 workers running which is a good number.
>> We cannot go for a customer-hosted load balancer as it is also NOT most cost-effective (needs custom load balancer to maintain and licensing) and same time the Mule App is not having Static IP Addresses which limits from going with custom load balancing.
>> An API Proxy is irrelevant there as it has no role to play w.r.t handling high volumes or load balancing.
So, the only right option to go with and fits the purpose of scenario being most cost-effective is - using a CloudHub Shared Load Balancer.
質問 38
An API client calls one method from an existing API implementation. The API implementation is later updated. What change to the API implementation would require the API client's invocation logic to also be updated?
- A. When a child method is added to the method called by the API client
- B. When a new required field is added to the method called by the API client
- C. When a new method is added to the resource used by the API client
- D. When the data type of the response is changed for the method called by the API client
正解: B
解説:
When a new required field is added to the method called by the API client
*****************************************
>> Generally, the logic on API clients need to be updated when the API contract breaks.
>> When a new method or a child method is added to an API , the API client does not break as it can still continue to use its existing method. So these two options are out.
>> We are left for two more where "datatype of the response if changed" and "a new required field is added".
>> Changing the datatype of the response does break the API contract. However, the question is insisting on the "invocation" logic and not about the response handling logic. The API client can still invoke the API successfully and receive the response but the response will have a different datatype for some field.
>> Adding a new required field will break the API's invocation contract. When adding a new required field, the API contract breaks the RAML or API spec agreement that the API client/API consumer and API provider has between them. So this requires the API client invocation logic to also be updated.
質問 39
......