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 PL
Mob_nav_barsMENU

ServiceNow Exam CIS-EM Topic 1 Question 64 Discussion

Actual exam question for ServiceNow's CIS-EM exam
Question #: 64
Topic #: 1
[All CIS-EM Questions]

Which is the best option to reduce latency issues when receiving events?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

by Kimberlie at Sep 15, 2024, 01:10 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CIS-EM Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Viola
2 months ago
Haha, this question is a real head-scratcher. I bet the exam writers are having a field day watching us debate this.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brittni
2 months ago
Wait, what if the bucket field in the em_event table is the real issue? Option A seems like it could be the solution we need.
upvoted 0 times
...
Fidelia
2 months ago
Hold on, I thought the whole point was to reduce latency. Wouldn't enabling multi-node processing be the best option? Option D looks promising.
upvoted 0 times
Lynelle
1 months ago
I agree, option D seems like a good choice to address latency issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buddy
1 months ago
But wouldn't it be better to verify event_processor_job_count = 0 to ensure optimal performance?
upvoted 0 times
...
Winfred
2 months ago
I think enabling multi-node processing could help reduce latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Kenneth
2 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. Isn't it better to have the event_processor_job_count set to 0 to reduce resource usage? Option C seems more reasonable to me.
upvoted 0 times
Portia
1 months ago
I believe option C is the most effective for reducing latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
1 months ago
I agree, option C seems like the optimal solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Olen
2 months ago
But what about option A or D?
upvoted 0 times
...
Katheryn
2 months ago
I think option C is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ivan
2 months ago
But wouldn't having more event processor jobs help in processing events faster?
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosalia
2 months ago
I disagree, I believe C) Verify event_processor_job_count = 0 would reduce latency issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ivan
3 months ago
I think the best option is B) Verify event_processor_job_count = 2.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jessenia
3 months ago
I think option B is the way to go. Two event processor jobs should help handle the event load effectively.
upvoted 0 times
Domonique
1 months ago
Let's go with option A, verifying bucket field in em_event table could help with latency issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Terrilyn
2 months ago
I'm not sure, but option D could also be a good solution to reduce latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annalee
2 months ago
I think option C might work better, having no event processor job count could reduce latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shannon
2 months ago
I agree, option B seems like the best choice.
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