MCIA-Level-1 Exam Dumps : MuleSoft Certified Integration Architect - Level 1

To meet the requirements of enriching logging with more context and improving throughput while reducing latency, the customer should use an asynchronous logging approach. Here's why option B is correct:

• Async Logger: Asynchronous logging helps in improving the performance by decoupling the logging from the main thread of execution. This reduces the latency of message processing since logging operations are offloaded to a separate thread.
• Logging Level Greater than INFO: Logging at levels such as WARN, ERROR, or FATAL ensures that only essential logs are written asynchronously, further enhancing performance. Avoiding DEBUG or TRACE levels unless necessary reduces the overhead of logging.
• Pattern Layout with [%MDC]: Using the pattern layout with [%MDC] in the log4j2.xml configuration file allows the inclusion of mapped diagnostic context in the logs. MDC is a feature that provides context-specific information, such as transaction IDs or user IDs, which helps in tracing and debugging.

Example configuration in log4j2.xml:

This configuration ensures that the logs are enriched with context information provided by MDC and processed asynchronously to maintain high throughput and low latency.

References

• Log4j2 Asynchronous Logging
• Mapped Diagnostic Context (MDC) in Log4j2

Explanation

High availability is about up-time of your application

A) High availability can be achieved only in CloudHub isn't correct statement. It can be achieved in customer hosted runtime planes as well

B) An object store is a facility for storing objects in or across Mule applications. Mule runtime engine (Mule) uses object stores to persist data for eventual retrieval. It can be used for disaster recovery but not for High Availability. Using object store can't guarantee that all instances won't go down at once. So not an appropriate choice.

Explanation

● Option A says "Perform EACH DB insert in a SEPARATE DB transaction". In this case if first DB insert is successful and second one fails then first insert won't be rolled back causing inconsistency. This option is ruled out.

● Option D says Perform BOTH DB inserts in ONE DB transaction.

Rule of thumb is when one or more DB connections are required we must use XA transaction as local transactions support only one resource. So this option is also ruled out.

● Option B acknowledges the before DB processing, so message is removed from the queue. In case of system failure at later point, message can't be retrieved.

● Option C is Valid: Though it says "do not ack JMS message", message will be auto acknowledged at the end of transaction. Here is how we can ensure all components are part of XA transaction:

Additional Information about transactions:

● XA Transactions - You can use an XA transaction to group together a series of operations from multiple transactional resources, such as JMS, VM or JDBC resources, into a single, very reliable, global transaction.

● The XA (eXtended Architecture) standard is an X/Open group standard which specifies the interface between a global transaction manager and local transactional resource managers.

The XA protocol defines a 2-phase commit protocol which can be used to more reliably coordinate and sequence a series of "all or nothing" operations across multiple servers, even servers of different types

● Use JMS ack if

– Acknowledgment should occur eventually, perhaps asynchronously

– The performance of the message receipt is paramount

– The message processing is idempotent

– For the choreography portion of the SAGA pattern

● Use JMS transactions

– For all other times in the integration you want to perform an atomic unit of work

– When the unit of work comprises more than the receipt of a single message

– To simply and unify the programming model (begin/commit/rollback)