A developer from the Central IT team has created an initial version of the RAML definition in Design Center for an OAuth 2.0-protected System API and published it to Exchange. Another developer from LoB IT discovered the System API in Exchange and would like to leverage it in the Process API. What is the MuleSoft-recommended approach for Process API to invoke the System API?
A. The Process API needs to import an CAuth 2.0 module from Exchange first and update it with OAuth 2.0 credentials before the System API can be invoked
B. The Process API uses property YAML files to store the System API URLs and uses the HTTP Request Connector to invoke the Systerm API
C. The Process APL uses the REST Connect Connector autogenerated in Exchange for the System API
D. The Process API manually updates the Process API POM file to include the System API as a dependency
Explanation:
In MuleSoft’s ecosystem, when a Process API needs to consume a System
API (published to Exchange and protected by OAuth 2.0), the recommended approach is to
utilize the REST Connect Connector. Here’s how it aligns with best practices:
An auto manufacturer has a mature CI/CD practice and wants to automate packaging and deployment of any Mule applications to various deployment targets, including CloudHub workers/replicas, customer-hosted Mule runtimes, and Anypoint Runtime Fabric. Which MuleSoft-provided tool or component facilitates automating the packaging and deployment of Mule applications to various deployment targets as part of the company's CI/CD practice?
A. Anypoint Runtime Manager
B. Mule Maven plugin
C. Anypoint Platform CLI
D. Anypoint Platform REST APIs
Explanation:
For organizations with established CI/CD practices, the Mule Maven plugin
is the recommended tool for automating packaging and deployment across multiple
environments, including CloudHub, on-premise Mule runtimes, and Anypoint Runtime
Fabric. Here’s why:
An organization uses various cloud-based SaaS systems and multiple on-premises
systems. The on-premises systems are an important part of the organization's application
network and can only be accessed from within the organization's intranet.
What is the best way to configure and use Anypoint Platform to support integrations with
both the cloud-based SaaS systems and on-premises systems?
A) Use CloudHub-deployed Mule runtimes in an Anypoint VPC managed by Anypoint
Platform Private Cloud Edition control plane
A.
Option A
B.
Option B
C.
Option C
D.
Option D
Option B
Explanation: •Explanation
Correct Answer: Use a combination of CloudHub-deployed and manually provisioned onpremises
Mule runtimes managed by the MuleSoft-hosted Platform control plane.
*****************************************
Key details to be taken from the given scenario:
>> Organization uses BOTH cloud-based and on-premises systems
>> On-premises systems can only be accessed from within the organization's intranet
Let us evaluate the given choices based on above key details:
>> CloudHub-deployed Mule runtimes can ONLY be controlled using MuleSoft-hosted
control plane. We CANNOT use Private Cloud Edition's control plane to control CloudHub
Mule Runtimes. So, option suggesting this is INVALID
>> Using CloudHub-deployed Mule runtimes in the shared worker cloud managed by the
MuleSoft-hosted Anypoint Platform is completely IRRELEVANT to given scenario and silly
choice. So, option suggesting this is INVALID
>> Using an on-premises installation of Mule runtimes that are completely isolated with NO
external network access, managed by the Anypoint Platform Private Cloud Edition control
plane would work for On-premises integrations. However, with NO external access,
integrations cannot be done to SaaS-based apps. Moreover CloudHub-hosted apps are
best-fit for integrating with SaaS-based applications. So, option suggesting this is BEST
WAY.
The best way to configure and use Anypoint Platform to support these mixed/hybrid
integrations is to use a combination of CloudHub-deployed and manually provisioned onpremises
Mule runtimes managed by the MuleSoft-hosted Platform control plane.
A retail company is using an Order API to accept new orders. The Order API uses a JMS
queue to submit orders to a backend order management service. The normal load for
orders is being handled using two (2) CloudHub workers, each configured with 0.2 vCore.
The CPU load of each CloudHub worker normally runs well below 70%. However, several
times during the year the Order API gets four times (4x) the average number of orders.
This causes the CloudHub worker CPU load to exceed 90% and the order submission time
to exceed 30 seconds. The cause, however, is NOT the backend order management
service, which still responds fast enough to meet the response SLA for the Order API.
What is the MOST resource-efficient way to configure the Mule application's CloudHub
deployment to help the company cope with this performance challenge?
A.
Permanently increase the size of each of the two (2) CloudHub workers by at least four
times (4x) to one (1) vCore
B.
Use a vertical CloudHub autoscaling policy that triggers on CPU utilization greater than
70%
C.
Permanently increase the number of CloudHub workers by four times (4x) to eight (8)
CloudHub workers
D.
Use a horizontal CloudHub autoscaling policy that triggers on CPU utilization greater
than 70%
Use a horizontal CloudHub autoscaling policy that triggers on CPU utilization greater
than 70%
Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: Use a horizontal CloudHub autoscaling policy that triggers on CPU
utilization greater than 70%
*****************************************
The scenario in the question is very clearly stating that the usual traffic in the year is pretty
well handled by the existing worker configuration with CPU running well below 70%. The
problem occurs only "sometimes" occasionally when there is spike in the number of orders
coming in.
So, based on above, We neither need to permanently increase the size of each worker nor
need to permanently increase the number of workers. This is unnecessary as other than
those "occasional" times the resources are idle and wasted.
We have two options left now. Either to use horizontal Cloudhub autoscaling policy to
automatically increase the number of workers or to use vertical Cloudhub autoscaling
policy to automatically increase the vCore size of each worker.
Here, we need to take two things into consideration:
1. CPU
2. Order Submission Rate to JMS Queue
>> From CPU perspective, both the options (horizontal and vertical scaling) solves the
issue. Both helps to bring down the usage below 90%.
>> However, If we go with Vertical Scaling, then from Order Submission Rate perspective,
as the application is still being load balanced with two workers only, there may not be much
improvement in the incoming request processing rate and order submission rate to JMS
queue. The throughput would be same as before. Only CPU utilization comes down.
>> But, if we go with Horizontal Scaling, it will spawn new workers and adds extra hand to
increase the throughput as more workers are being load balanced now. This way we can
address both CPU and Order Submission rate.
Hence, Horizontal CloudHub Autoscaling policy is the right and best answer.
The Line of Business (LoB) of an eCommerce company is requesting a process that sends automated notifications via email every time a new order is processed through the customer's mobile application or through the internal company's web application. In the future, multiple notification channels may be added: for example, text messages and push notifications. What is the most effective API-led connectivity approach for the scenario described above?
A. Create one Experience API for the web application and one for the mobile application.
Create a Process API to orchestrate and retrieve the email template from = database.
Create a System API that sends the email using the Anypoint Connector for Email.
Create one Experience API for the web application and one for the mobile application.
Create a Process API to orchestrate and retrieve the email template from = database.
Create a System API that sends the email using the Anypoint Connector for Email.
B. Create one Experience API for the web application and one for the mobile application
Create a Process API to orchestrate, retrieve the email template from a database, and
send the email using the Anypoint Connector for Email.
C. Create Experience APIs for both the web application and mobile application.
Create a Process API ta orchestrate, retrieve the email template from e database, and
send the email using the Anypoint Connector for Email.
D. Create Experience APIs for both the web application and mobile application.
(Create 3 Process API to orchestrate and retrieve the email template from 2 database.
Create a System API that sends the email using the Anypoint Connector for Email.
Explanation:
In this scenario, the best approach to satisfy the API-led connectivity
principles and support future scalability is:
A team is planning to enhance an Experience API specification, and they are following APIled connectivity design principles. What is their motivation for enhancing the API?
A. The primary API consumer wants certain kinds of endpoints changed from the Center for Enablement standard to the consumer system standard
B. The underlying System API is updated to provide more detailed data for several heavily used resources
C. An IP Allowlist policy is being added to the API instances in the Development and Staging environments
D. A Canonical Data Model is being adopted that impacts several types of data included in the API
Explanation:
In API-led design, an Experience API is enhanced to improve how data is
delivered to end-user applications. One primary reason to enhance an Experience API is
when new data standards, such as a Canonical Data Model, are adopted. Here’s why:
A business process is being implemented within an organization's application network. The architecture group proposes using a more coarse-grained application network design with relatively fewer APIs deployed to the application network compared to a more fine-grained design. Overall, which factor typically increases with a more coarse-grained design for this business process implementation and deployment compared with using a more finegrained design?
A. The complexity of each API implementation
B. The number of discoverable assets related to APIs deployed in the application network
C. The number of possible connections between API implementations in the application network
D. The usage of network infrastructure resources by the application network
An organization requires several APIs to be secured with OAuth 2.0, and PingFederate has been identified as the identity provider for API client authorization, The PingFederate Client Provider is configured in access management, and the PingFederate OAuth 2.0 Token Enforcement policy is configured for the API instances required by the organization. The API instances reside in two business groups (Group A and Group B) within the Master Organization (Master Org). What should be done to allow API consumers to access the API instances?
A. The API administrator should configure the correct client discovery URL in both child business groups, and the API consumer should request access to the API in Ping Identity
B. The API administrator should grant access to the API consumers by creating contracts in the relevant API instances in API Manager
C. The APL consumer should create a client application and request access to the APT in Anypoint Exchange, and the API administrator should approve the request
D. The APT consumer should create a client application and request access to the API in Ping Identity, and the organization's Ping Identity workflow will grant access
| Page 1 out of 19 Pages |
Contact Us - Privacy Policy ... Copyright © - All Rights Reserved