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

Salesforce Exam Salesforce MuleSoft Developer II Topic 1 Question 11 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's Salesforce MuleSoft Developer II exam
Question #: 11
Topic #: 1
[All Salesforce MuleSoft Developer II Questions]

An organization uses CloudHub to deploy all of its applications.

How can a common-global-handler flow be configured so that it can be reused across all of the organization's deployed applications?

A.

Create a Mule plugin project

Create a common-global-error-handler flow inside the plugin project.

Use this plugin as a dependency in all Mute applications.

Import that configuration file in Mute applications.

B.

Create a common-global-error-handler flow in all Mule Applications Refer to it flow-ref wherever needed.

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer

Contribute your Thoughts:

Gertude
4 months ago
Haha, imagine if the answer was 'Create a Mule Hamster project and use that as a dependency.' Now that would be a real curveball!
upvoted 0 times
...
Jamal
4 months ago
Option A looks good, but I'm a bit worried about the 'Mule plugin' part. Isn't that for more advanced use cases? Hmm, I'll have to think about this one.
upvoted 0 times
Silva
3 months ago
I see, I'll have to think about whether the benefits outweigh the complexity. Thanks for the explanation!
upvoted 0 times
...
Carrol
4 months ago
Yes, creating a Mule plugin project can be a bit advanced, but it allows for reusing the common-global-error-handler flow across all applications.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lilli
4 months ago
Option A looks good, but I'm a bit worried about the 'Mule plugin' part. Isn't that for more advanced use cases?
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lottie
4 months ago
Nah, I don't like option B. Referencing the error handler flow-ref in each app seems like a maintenance nightmare waiting to happen.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacob
4 months ago
I think option C is the most organized approach, using a plugin project for reusability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Levi
4 months ago
I prefer option B, it's simpler to just create the flow in each application.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mitsue
5 months ago
Option D seems a bit overkill to me. Creating a whole Mule domain project just for a common error handler feels like too much overhead.
upvoted 0 times
Troy
4 months ago
Yeah, Option D does seem like overkill. It's better to keep things simple and efficient.
upvoted 0 times
...
Trinidad
4 months ago
Option B might work for smaller projects, but for a larger organization, Option A is definitely the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Joni
4 months ago
I agree, using a Mule plugin project makes it easier to manage and maintain the common error handler.
upvoted 0 times
...
Isreal
4 months ago
Option A seems like the best approach. It keeps things organized and reusable.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ronny
5 months ago
Hmm, I think option C is the way to go. Creating a Mule plugin project and using it as a dependency seems like the most efficient and reusable approach.
upvoted 0 times
Ailene
4 months ago
Using a plugin as a dependency in all Mule applications is a smart move for maintaining consistency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Magdalene
4 months ago
I agree, creating a Mule plugin project will save a lot of time and effort in the long run.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thaddeus
4 months ago
Option C is definitely the best choice. It allows for easy reuse of the common-global-error-handler flow.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Olene
5 months ago
I agree with Weldon, using a plugin project seems more efficient.
upvoted 0 times
...
Weldon
5 months ago
I think option A is the best way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77