MCPA-Level-1 Exam Dumps : MuleSoft Certified Platform Architect - Level 1

Explanation

Correct Answer: Anypoint Runtime Fabric

*****************************************

>> When a customer is already having an Azure environment, It is not at all an ideal approach to go with hybrid model having some Mule Runtimes hosted on Azure and some on MuleSoft. This is unnecessary and useless.

>> CloudHub is a Mulesoft-hosted Runtime plane and is on AWS. We cannot customize to point CloudHub to customer's Azure environment.

>> Anypoint Platform for Pivotal Cloud Foundry is specifically for infrastructure provided by Pivotal Cloud Foundry

>> Anypoint Runtime Fabric is right answer as it is a container service that automates the deployment and orchestration of Mule applications and API gateways. Runtime Fabric runs within a customer-managed infrastructure on AWS, Azure, virtual machines (VMs), and bare-metal servers.

-Some of the capabilities of Anypoint Runtime Fabric include:

-Isolation between applications by running a separate Mule runtime per application.

-Ability to run multiple versions of Mule runtime on the same set of resources.

-Scaling applications across multiple replicas.

-Automated application fail-over.

-Application management with Anypoint Runtime Manager.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Create a bounded-context model for the system layer to closely match the backend data model, and add an anti-corruption layer to let the different bounded contexts cooperate across the system and process layers

*****************************************

>> Canonical models are not an option here as the organization has already put in efforts and created bounded-context models for Experience and Process APIs.

>> Anti-corruption layers for ALL APIs is unnecessary and invalid because it is mentioned that experience and process APIs share same bounded-context model. It is just the System layer APIs that need to choose their approach now.

>> So, having an anti-corruption layer just between the process and system layers will work well. Also to speed up the approach, system APIs can mimic the backend system data model.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Allow System APIs to return data that is NOT currently required by the identified Process or Experience APIs.

*****************************************

>> All customizations for the end-user application should be handled in "Experience API" only. Not in Process API

>> We should use tiered approach but NOT always by creating exactly one API for each of the 3 layers. Experience APIs might be one but Process APIs and System APIs are often more than one. System APIs for sure will be more than one all the time as they are the smallest modular APIs built in front of end systems.

>> Process APIs can call System APIs as well as other Process APIs. There is no such anti-design pattern in API-Led connectivity saying Process APIs should not call other Process APIs.

So, the right answer in the given set of options that makes sense as per API-Led connectivity principles is to allow System APIs to return data that is NOT currently required by the identified Process or Experience APIs. This way, some future Process APIs can make use of that data from System APIs and we need NOT touch the System layer APIs again and again.