Salesforce MuleSoft-Platform-Architect-I Salesforce Certified MuleSoft Platform Architect 1 Exam (WI25) Exam Practice Test

Understanding Coarse-Grained vs. Fine-Grained API Design:

A coarse-grained design consolidates multiple operations within a single API, leading to fewer APIs but with more complex implementations. Conversely, a fine-grained design breaks down functionalities into smaller, more specific APIs, resulting in simpler implementations but a larger number of APIs.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A (Correct Answer): With a coarse-grained design, each API handles more functionalities, increasing the complexity of each API implementation as it needs to manage more use cases and logic.

Option B: A coarse-grained design typically reduces the number of APIs, so fewer discoverable assets are available.

Option C: Fewer APIs generally mean fewer connections between them in the application network.

Option D: Network infrastructure usage may actually decrease with fewer APIs, as there are fewer calls between APIs.

Conclusion:

Option A is the correct answer, as the complexity of each API implementation increases in a coarse-grained design due to the consolidation of multiple functionalities into single APIs.

Refer to MuleSoft’s documentation on API design principles and best practices for coarse-grained vs. fine-grained API implementation.

Explanation

Correct Answer: XML over HTTP

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

>> API-led connectivity and Application Networks urge to have the APIs on HTTP based protocols for building most effective APIs and networks on top of them.

>> The HTTP based APIs allow the platform to apply various varities of policies to address many NFRs

>> The HTTP based APIs also allow to implement many standard and effective implementation patterns that adhere to HTTP based w3c rules.

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Explanation

Correct Answer: The test runs immediately after the Mule application has been compiled and packaged

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

>> Integration tests are the last layer of tests we need to add to be fully covered.

>> These tests actually run against Mule running with your full configuration in place and are tested from external source as they work in PROD.

>> These tests exercise the application as a whole with actual transports enabled. So, external systems are affected when these tests run.

So, these tests do NOT run immediately after the Mule application has been compiled and packaged.

FYI... Unit Tests are the one that run immediately after the Mule application has been compiled and packaged.

Explanation

Correct Answer: When server-side load-balanced TLS mutual authentication is required between API implementations and API clients

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

Fact/ Memory Tip: Although there are many benefits of CloudHub Dedicated Load balancer, TWO important things that should come to ones mind for considering it are:

>> Having URL endpoints with Custom DNS names on CloudHub deployed apps

>> Configuring custom certificates for both HTTPS and Two-way (Mutual) authentication.

Coming to the options provided for this question:

>> We CANNOT use DLB to perform cross-region load balancing between separate deployments of the same Mule application.

>> We can have mapping rules to have more than one DLB URL pointing to same Mule app. But vicevera (More than one Mule app having same DLB URL) is NOT POSSIBLE

>> It is true that DLB helps to setup custom DNS names for Cloudhub deployed Mule apps but NOT true for apps deployed to Customer-hosted Mule Runtimes.

>> It is true to that we can load balance API invocations across multiple CloudHub workers using DLB but it is NOT A MUST. We can achieve the same (load balancing) using SLB (Shared Load Balancer) too. We DO NOT necessarily require DLB for achieve it.

So the only right option that fits the scenario and requires us to use DLB is when TLS mutual authentication is required between API implementations and API clients.

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.

Explanation

Correct Answer: They are typically written using MUnit to run in an embedded Mule runtime that does not require external connectivity.

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

Below TWO are characteristics of Integration Tests but NOT unit tests:

>> They test the validity of input and output of source and target systems.

>> They must be triggered by an external client tool or event source.

It is NOT TRUE that Unit Tests must be run in a unit testing environment with dedicated Mule runtimes for the environment.

MuleSoft offers MUnit for writing Unit Tests and they run in an embedded Mule Runtime without needing any separate/ dedicated Runtimes to execute them. They also do NOT need any external connectivity as MUnit supports mocking via stubs.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Process Layer

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

>> Experience layer is dedicated for enrichment of end user experience. This layer is to meet the needs of different API clients/ consumers.

>> System layer is dedicated to APIs which are modular in nature and implement/ expose various individual functionalities of backend systems

>> Process layer is the place where simple or complex business orchestration logic is written by invoking one or many System layer modular APIs

So, Process Layer is the right answer.

Understanding API Autodiscovery in MuleSoft:

API Autodiscovery links an API implementation in Anypoint Platform with its configuration in API Manager. This is controlled by the API ID which is set in the API Autodiscovery element in the Mule application.

The API ID remains consistent across minor updates to the API asset version in Exchange (e.g., from 2.0.0 to 2.0.1) as long as it is the same API.

Effect of Asset Version Update on API Autodiscovery:

When the asset version is updated (e.g., from 2.0.0 to 2.0.1), the API ID remains the same. Therefore, no changes are needed in the Autodiscovery configuration within the Mule application. The Autodiscovery will continue to link the API implementation to the latest version in API Manager.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A: Incorrect, as the API ID does not automatically change with minor asset version updates.

Option B: Incorrect, as the API ID remains the same, so no update is needed in the API implementation.

Option C (Correct Answer): The API ID does not change, so no changes are necessary in the API implementation for the new asset version.

Option D: Incorrect, as there is no need to update the API implementation in the Autodiscovery global element for minor version changes.

Conclusion:

Option C is the correct answer, as the API ID remains unchanged with minor version updates, and no changes are needed in the API Autodiscovery configuration.

Refer to MuleSoft documentation on API Autodiscovery and version management for more details.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Configure a “Worker not responding” alert in Anypoint Runtime Manager.

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

>> All the options eventually helps to generate the alert required when the application stops responding.

>> However, handling exceptions within calling API and then raising alert from API client is inappropriate and silly. There could be many API clients invoking the API implementation and it is not ideal to have this setup consistently in all of them. Not a realistic way to do.

>> Implementing a health check/ heartbeat with in the API and calling from outside to detmine the health sounds OK but needs extra setup for it and same time there are very good chances of generating false alarms when there are any intermittent network issues between external tool calling the health check API on API implementation. The API implementation itself may not have any issues but due to some other factors some false alarms may go out.

>> Creating an alert in API Manager when the API receives no requests within a specified time period would actually generate realistic alerts but even here some false alarms may go out when there are genuinely no requests from API clients.

The best and right way to achieve this requirement is to setup an alert on Runtime Manager with a condition "Worker not responding". This would generate an alert AS SOON AS the workers become unresponsive.

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Explanation

Correct Answer: When development is already organized into several independent initiatives or groups

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

>> It would require lot of process effort in an organization to have a single C4E team coordinating with multiple already organized development teams which are into several independent initiatives. A single C4E works well with different teams having at least a common initiative. So, in this scenario, federated C4E works well instead of centralized C4E.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Create separate Anypoint VPCs for non-production and production environments, then configure connections to the backend systems in the corresponding customer-hosted environments.

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

>> Creating different Business Groups does NOT make any difference w.r.t accessing the non-prod and prod customer-hosted environments. Still they will be accessing from both Business Groups unless process network restrictions are put in place.

>> We need to modify or couple the Mule Application Implementations with the environment. In fact, we should never implements application coupled with environments by binding them in the properties. Only basic things like endpoint URL etc should be bundled in properties but not environment level access restrictions.

>> IP addresses on CloudHub are dynamic until unless a special static addresses are assigned. So it is not possible to setup firewall rules in customer-hosted infrastrcture. More over, even if static IP addresses are assigned, there could be 100s of applications running on cloudhub and setting up rules for all of them would be a hectic task, non-maintainable and definitely got a good practice.

>> The best practice recommended by Mulesoft (In fact any cloud provider), is to have your Anypoint VPCs seperated for Prod and Non-Prod and perform the VPC peering or VPN tunneling for these Anypoint VPCs to respective Prod and Non-Prod customer-hosted environment networks.

Understanding API Functional Monitoring:

API Functional Monitoring is a feature within MuleSoft's Anypoint Platform that enables users to monitor the health and performance of APIs and endpoints by running functional tests at scheduled intervals.

It checks whether APIs are functioning as expected by running test calls and then evaluating if the response meets the desired conditions. This is particularly useful for testing endpoint availability, checking for specific data in responses, and measuring API performance over time.

Component Features:

Scheduled Intervals: Functional monitoring allows configuring tests to run at regular intervals, such as every minute, hour, or day, depending on the monitoring requirements.

Reports on Test Pass/Fail Status: After each test run, API Functional Monitoring reports whether the API passed or failed the test conditions.

Performance Statistics: It displays metrics like average response time, success rate, and error rates, giving insights into API health and performance.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A (API Analytics): API Analytics provides insights on API usage and metrics but does not involve scheduled tests for pass/fail status or endpoint health checks.

Option B (Anypoint Monitoring Dashboards): These dashboards display API metrics but do not actively test API endpoints or provide pass/fail reporting on a scheduled basis.

Option C (Correct Answer): API Functional Monitoring fits the description, as it is designed to monitor API and endpoint health with scheduled test runs and display statistics about performance.

Option D (Anypoint Runtime Manager Alerts): Runtime Manager alerts notify users of issues with application status but do not actively test endpoints at scheduled intervals.

Conclusion:

Option C (API Functional Monitoring) is the correct answer because it provides the necessary tools to test API functionality, monitor endpoint health, and display performance statistics in real-time.

Refer to MuleSoft documentation on API Functional Monitoring for further guidance on setting up and configuring these tests in Anypoint Platform.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Apply a JSON threat protection policy to all APIs to detect potential threat vectors

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

>> Usually, if the APIs are designed and developed for specific consumers (known consumers/customers) then we would IP Whitelist the same to ensure that traffic only comes from them.

>> However, as this scenario states that the APIs are publicly available and being used by so many mobile and web applications, it is NOT possible to identify and blacklist all possible bad actors.

>> So, JSON threat protection policy is the best chance to prevent any bad JSON payloads from such bad actors.

Understanding the Requirements:

The business needs to transfer daily data changes from the Salesforce Account and Case objects to AWS DynamoDB in a single JSON format.

Only a subset of attributes (5 from Account and 8 from Case) is required, so it is not necessary to include all 219 attributes of the Account object.

Design Approach:

A System API (SAPI) should be created for each Salesforce object (Account and Case), exposing only the required fields (5 attributes for Account and 8 for Case).

A Process API (PAPI) can be used to aggregate and transform the data from these SAPIs, combining the 13 selected attributes from Account and Case into a single JSON structure for DynamoDB.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A: Mimicking all attributes in the SAPI is inefficient and unnecessary, as only 13 attributes are required.

Option B: Replicating all attributes in DynamoDB is excessive and would result in higher storage and processing costs, which is unnecessary given the requirement for only a subset of attributes.

Option C: Implementing an Enterprise Data Model could be useful in broader data management but is not required here, as the focus is on a lightweight integration.

Option D (Correct Answer): Creating separate entities in SAPI for Account and Case with only the required attributes and using the PAPI to aggregate them into a single JSON is the most efficient and meets the requirements effectively.

Conclusion:

Option D is the best choice as it provides a lightweight, efficient design that meets the requirements by transferring only the necessary attributes and minimizing resource use.

Refer to MuleSoft's best practices for API-led connectivity and data modeling to structure SAPIs and PAPIs efficiently.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Data on past API invocations to help identify anomalies and usage patterns across various APIs

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

API Invocation metrics provided by Anypoint Platform:

>> Does NOT provide any Return Of Investment (ROI) related information. So the option suggesting it is OUT.

>> Does NOT provide any information w.r.t how APIs are reused, whether there is effective usage of APIs or not etc...

>> Does NOT prodive any prediction information as such to help us proactively identify any future policy violations.

So, the kind of data/information we can get from such metrics is on past API invocations to help identify anomalies and usage patterns across various APIs.

Explanation

Correct Answer: When regulatory requirements mandate on-premises processing of EVERY data item, including meta-data.

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

We need NOT require to use Anypoint Platform PCE or PCF for the below. So these options are OUT.

>> We can make ALL applications highly available across multiple data centers using CloudHub too.

>> We can use Anypoint VPN and tunneling from CloudHub to connect to ALL backend systems in the application network that are deployed in the organization's intranet.

>> We can use Anypoint VPC and Firewall Rules to make ALL APIs private and NOT exposed to the public cloud.

Only valid reason in the given options that requires to use Anypoint Platform PCE/ PCF is - When regulatory requirements mandate on-premises processing of EVERY data item, including meta-data.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Create reusable assets, Make them discoverable so that LOB teams can self-serve and browse the APIs, Get active feedback and usage metrics.

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

Diagram, arrow Description automatically generated

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:

Canonical Data Model (CDM):

Adopting a CDM standardizes data representations across the organization, making APIs more consistent and easier to consume across various services and applications.

Updating the Experience API ensures that it delivers data in this standardized format, improving interoperability and reusability.

Explanation of Correct Answer (D):

A CDM impacts the structure and types of data the API provides, and this update would be directly relevant to an Experience API, as it is the primary point of interaction for applications.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option A involves adapting to consumer-specific standards, which is against API-led design principles.

Option B involves changes in System APIs, which don’t directly mandate changes to the Experience API unless data formatting adjustments are required.

Option C (IP Allowlist) relates to security rather than API design and would not motivate a functional enhancement of the API.

ReferencesFor more details on the use of Canonical Data Models in API-led architecture, refer to MuleSoft’s guidelines on data standardization and Experience API best practices​.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Guarding against Denial of Service attacks

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

>> Backend system overloading can be handled by enforcing "Spike Control Policy"

>> Logging HTTP requests and responses can be done by enforcing "Message Logging Policy"

>> Credentials can be tamper-proofed using "Security" and "Compliance" Policies

However, unfortunately, there is no proper way currently on Anypoint Platform to guard against DOS attacks.

When managing high traffic to an API, especially with POST requests, it is crucial to ensure the API’s policies both protect the back-end systems and provide a smooth client experience. Here’s the approach to reducing errors:

Rate Limiting Policy: This policy enforces a limit on the number of requests within a defined time period. However, rate limiting alone may cause clients to hit limits during demand surges, leading to errors.

Adding an SLA-based Spike Control Policy:

Spike Control is designed to handle sudden increases in traffic by smoothing out bursts of requests, which is particularly useful during high-demand periods.

By configuring SLA-based Spike Control, you can define thresholds for specific client tiers. For instance, premium clients might have higher limits or more flexibility in traffic bursts than standard clients.

Why Option D is Correct:

Keeping the Rate Limiting policy continues to provide baseline protection for the back-end.

Adding the SLA-based Spike Control policy allows for differentiated control, where requests are queued or delayed during bursts rather than outright rejected. This approach significantly reduces error responses to clients while still controlling overall traffic.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option A (adding Client ID Enforcement) would not reduce errors related to traffic surges.

Option B (HTTP Caching) is not applicable as caching is generally ineffective for non-idempotent requests like POST.

Option C (only Spike Control without Rate Limiting) may leave the back-end system vulnerable to sustained high traffic levels, reducing protection.

ReferencesFor more information on configuring Rate Limiting and SLA-based Spike Control policies, refer to MuleSoft documentation on API Policies and Rate Limiting​​.

Correct Answer: Use an SLA-based rate limiting policy and assign a client application to a matching SLA tier based on its type.

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

>> SLA tiers will come into play whenever any limits to be imposed on APIs based on client type

Understanding Nonfunctional Requirements (NFRs):

The NFRs in this context are related to security measures implemented for the Web API, such as rate limiting, LDAP-based authentication, JSON threat protection, and IP allowlist policies.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A (Correct Answer): The IP allowlist policy restricts access to known subnets, ensuring that API invocations come from a defined range of IPs.

Option B (Correct Answer): Basic Authentication with LDAP enforces a username/password validation, satisfying an NFR for identity verification.

Option C: Masking sensitive data is not part of the listed NFRs, as none of the mentioned policies address data masking.

Option D: XML threat protection is not mentioned, so this option is incorrect.

Option E: While rate-limiting implies performance control, it does not directly enforce a specific performance expectation.

Conclusion:

Options A and B are correct as they directly address the implemented security measures related to IP range restrictions and username/password authentication.

Refer to MuleSoft's documentation on API security policies for details on LDAP, rate limiting, and allowlist policies.

Explanation

Correct Answer: From the Mule runtime irrespective of the deployment model

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

>> Monitoring and Alerting metrics are always originated from Mule Runtimes irrespective of the deployment model.

>> It may seems that some metrics (Runtime Manager) are originated from Mule Runtime and some are (API Invocations/ API Analytics) from API Manager. However, this is realistically NOT TRUE. The reason is, API manager is just a management tool for API instances but all policies upon applying on APIs eventually gets executed on Mule Runtimes only (Either Embedded or API Proxy).

>> Similarly all API Implementations also run on Mule Runtimes.

So, most of the day required for monitoring and alerts are originated fron Mule Runtimes only irrespective of whether the deployment model is MuleSoft-hosted or Customer-hosted or Hybrid.

Explanation

Correct Answer: When a new required field is added to the method called by the API client

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

>> Generally, the logic on API clients need to be updated when the API contract breaks.

>> When a new method or a child method is added to an API , the API client does not break as it can still continue to use its existing method. So these two options are out.

>> We are left for two more where "datatype of the response if changed" and "a new required field is added".

>> Changing the datatype of the response does break the API contract. However, the question is insisting on the "invocation" logic and not about the response handling logic. The API client can still invoke the API successfully and receive the response but the response will have a different datatype for some field.

>> Adding a new required field will break the API's invocation contract. When adding a new required field, the API contract breaks the RAML or API spec agreement that the API client/API consumer and API provider has between them. So this requires the API client invocation logic to also be updated.

Explanation

Correct Answer: They must be deployed to Anypoint Platform runtime planes that are managed by Anypoint Platform control planes, with both planes in the same Jurisdiction.

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

>> As per legal regulations, all data processing to be performed within a certain jurisdiction. Meaning, the data in USA should reside within USA and should not go out. Same way, the data in EU should reside within EU and should not go out.

>> So, just encrypting the data in transit and at rest does not help to be compliant with the rules. We need to make sure that data does not go out too.

>> The data that we are talking here is not just about the messages that are published to Anypoint MQ. It includes the apps running, transaction states, application logs, events, metric info and any other metadata. So, just replacing Anypoint MQ with a locally hosted ActiveMQ does NOT help.

>> The data that we are talking here is not just about the key/value pairs that are stored in Object Store. It includes the messages published, apps running, transaction states, application logs, events, metric info and any other metadata. So, just avoiding using Object Store does NOT help.

>> The only option left and also the right option in the given choices is to deploy application on runtime and control planes that are both within the jurisdiction.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Build several Bounded Context Data Models that align with coherent parts of the business processes and the definitions of associated business entities.

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

>> The options w.r.t building API data models using XML schema/ Agile API-centric practices are irrelevant to the scenario given in the question. So these two are INVALID.

>> Building EDM (Enterprise Data Model) is not feasible or right fit for this scenario as the teams and LOBs work in silo and they all have different initiatives, budget etc.. Building EDM needs intensive coordination among all the team which evidently seems not possible in this scenario.

So, the right fit for this scenario is to build several Bounded Context Data Models that align with coherent parts of the business processes and the definitions of associated business entities.

MuleSoft offers various tools to automate the deployment of Mule applications, which can streamline deployment and management processes. Here’s how each tool supports automated deployment:

Runtime Manager:

Anypoint Runtime Manager is MuleSoft’s web-based interface that allows users to deploy, manage, and monitor applications directly. It provides deployment automation through its user-friendly interface.

Anypoint Platform CLI:

The Anypoint CLI enables scripting of deployment and management tasks, making it possible to automate deployments via command-line scripts. This tool is ideal for CI/CD pipelines as it integrates with automated processes.

Platform APIs:

MuleSoft’s Platform APIs allow programmatic access to deployment functions, enabling integration with external automation tools and CI/CD systems. These APIs facilitate deployment through RESTful calls, which can be automated for continuous delivery.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option D (Anypoint Studio) is primarily for development and does not support deployment automation.

Option E (Maven Plugin) can be used for building and deploying Mule applications but isn’t classified as a platform tool for deployment.

Option F (API Community Manager) is unrelated to deployment and instead focuses on managing API communities.

ReferencesFor detailed steps on automating deployments with these tools, refer to MuleSoft documentation on Runtime Manager, CLI, and Platform APIs​.

Explanation

Correct Answer: When a pragmatic approach with only limited isolation from the backend system is deemed appropriate.

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

General guidance w.r.t choosing Data Models:

>> If an Enterprise Data Model is in use then the API data model of System APIs should make use of data types from that Enterprise Data Model and the corresponding API implementation should translate between these data types from the Enterprise Data Model and the native data model of the backend system.

>> If no Enterprise Data Model is in use then each System API should be assigned to a Bounded Context, the API data model of System APIs should make use of data types from the corresponding Bounded Context Data Model and the corresponding API implementation should translate between these data types from the Bounded Context Data Model and the native data model of the backend system. In this scenario, the data types in the Bounded Context Data Model are defined purely in terms of their business characteristics and are typically not related to the native data model of the backend system. In other words, the translation effort may be significant.

>> If no Enterprise Data Model is in use, and the definition of a clean Bounded Context Data Model is considered too much effort, then the API data model of System APIs should make use of data types that approximately mirror those from the backend system, same semantics and naming as backend system, lightly sanitized, expose all fields needed for the given System API’s functionality, but not significantly more and making good use of REST conventions.

The latter approach, i.e., exposing in System APIs an API data model that basically mirrors that of the backend system, does not provide satisfactory isolation from backend systems through the System API tier on its own. In particular, it will typically not be possible to "swap out" a backend system without significantly changing all System APIs in front of that backend system and therefore the API implementations of all Process APIs that depend on those System APIs! This is so because it is not desirable to prolong the life of a previous backend system’s data model in the form of the API data model of System APIs that now front a new backend system. The API data models of System APIs following this approach must therefore change when the backend system is replaced.

On the other hand:

>> It is a very pragmatic approach that adds comparatively little overhead over accessing the backend system directly

>> Isolates API clients from intricacies of the backend system outside the data model (protocol, authentication, connection pooling, network address, …)

>> Allows the usual API policies to be applied to System APIs

>> Makes the API data model for interacting with the backend system explicit and visible, by exposing it in the RAML definitions of the System APIs

>> Further isolation from the backend system data model does occur in the API implementations of the Process API tier

To monitor an application network and predict issues without custom scripts, policy violation metrics are critical. They provide insights into potential problems by tracking instances where API usage does not conform to defined policies. Here’s why this approach is suitable:

Predictive Monitoring:

Tracking API policy violations (such as rate limits or spike controls being hit) can indicate surges in traffic or misuse, which may lead to throttling or service degradation if not addressed.

By monitoring these violations, teams can proactively adjust limits or optimize API handling to prevent actual failures.

No Custom Scripting Needed:

Policy violation metrics are available within MuleSoft’s Anypoint Monitoring, meaning there’s no need to implement custom solutions or external tools to gather and interpret this data.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option B (effectiveness based on reuse) does not directly predict failures.

Option C (past invocation counts) offers historical usage data but does not inherently identify issues.

Option D (ROI from API invocation) is a business metric and does not provide technical insights for failure prediction.

ReferencesFor more details on leveraging policy violation metrics for proactive monitoring, refer to MuleSoft documentation on Anypoint Monitoring​​.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Increase the size of the CloudHub worker(s)

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

The key details that we can take out from the given scenario are:

>> API implementation uses a database bulk insert command to submit all the purchase data to a database

>> JDBC driver processes the data into a set of several temporary disk files on the CloudHub worker

>> Sometimes a request fails and the logs show a message indicating an out-of-file-space message

Based on above details:

>> Both auto-scaling options does NOT help because we cannot set auto-scaling rules based on error messages. Auto-scaling rules are kicked-off based on CPU/Memory usages and not due to some given error or disk space issues.

>> Increasing the number of CloudHub workers also does NOT help here because the reason for the failure is not due to performance aspects w.r.t CPU or Memory. It is due to disk-space.

>> Moreover, the API is doing bulk insert to submit the received batch data. Which means, all data is handled by ONE worker only at a time. So, the disk space issue should be tackled on "per worker" basis. Having multiple workers does not help as the batch may still fail on any worker when disk is out of space on that particular worker.

Therefore, the right way to deal this issue and resolve this is to increase the vCore size of the worker so that a new worker with more disk space will be provisioned.

Explanation

Correct Answer: To invoke OAuth 2.0-protected APIs managed by Anypoint Platform, API clients must submit access tokens issued by that same Identity Provider

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

>> It is NOT necessary that single sign-on is required to sign in to Anypoint Platform because we are using an external Identity Provider for Client Management

>> It is NOT necessary that all APIs managed by Anypoint Platform must be protected by SAML 2.0 policies because we are using an external Identity Provider for Client Management

>> Not TRUE that the application network must include System APIs that interact with the Identity Provider because we are using an external Identity Provider for Client Management

Only TRUE statement in the given options is - "To invoke OAuth 2.0-protected APIs managed by Anypoint Platform, API clients must submit access tokens issued by that same Identity Provider"

References:

Explanation

Correct Answer: Invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment; add timeout and retry logic to the process API to avoid intermittent failures; if it still fails, invoke the system API deployed to the DR environment

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

There is one important consideration to be noted in the question which is - System API in DR environment provides only 20% of the rate limiting offered by the primary environment. So, comparitively, very less calls will be allowed into the DR environment API opposed to its primary environment. With this in mind, lets analyse what is the right and best fault-tolerant invocation strategy.

1. Invoking both the system APIs in parallel is definitely NOT a feasible approach because of the 20% limitation we have on DR environment. Calling in parallel every time would easily and quickly exhaust the rate limits on DR environment and may not give chance to genuine intermittent error scenarios to let in during the time of need.

2. Another option given is suggesting to add timeout and retry logic to process API while invoking primary environment's system API. This is good so far. However, when all retries failed, the option is suggesting to invoke the copy of process API on DR environment which is not right or recommended. Only system API is the one to be considered for fallback and not the whole process API. Process APIs usually have lot of heavy orchestration calling many other APIs which we do not want to repeat again by calling DR's process API. So this option is NOT right.

3. One more option given is suggesting to add the retry (no timeout) logic to process API to directly retry on DR environment's system API instead of retrying the primary environment system API first. This is not at all a proper fallback. A proper fallback should occur only after all retries are performed and exhausted on Primary environment first. But here, the option is suggesting to directly retry fallback API on first failure itself without trying main API. So, this option is NOT right too.

This leaves us one option which is right and best fit.

- Invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment

- Add Timeout and Retry logic on it in process API

- If it fails even after all retries, then invoke the system API deployed to the DR environment.

Understanding Anypoint Monitoring and Its Capabilities:

Anypoint Monitoring provides comprehensive visibility into Mule applications, offering metrics and analytics such as request counts, response times, CPU utilization, memory usage, and other key performance indicators (KPIs). This tool is designed to help teams monitor API usage, troubleshoot issues, and optimize application performance.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A (Correct Answer): Anypoint Monitoring is the ideal tool for this requirement. It provides real-time insights into metrics such as the number of requests, response times, CPU utilization, and active API usage.

Option B (API Manager): API Manager focuses on API lifecycle management, including applying policies, managing contracts, and setting access controls. It does not provide performance monitoring or KPI tracking.

Option C (Runtime Alerts): Runtime Alerts can notify users of specific conditions, like high CPU usage, but they do not provide a full suite of metrics or insights over a given time period.

Option D (Functional Monitoring): Functional Monitoring focuses on functional testing of APIs rather than performance and usage metrics. It does not provide continuous KPI tracking.

Conclusion:

Option A is the correct answer. Anypoint Monitoring is the most suitable tool to track the specified metrics, providing detailed insights into API requests, response times, CPU usage, and active API counts.

For further details, refer to MuleSoft’s Anypoint Monitoring documentation on configuring dashboards and tracking performance metrics.

Explanation

Correct Answer: At the process and system tiers

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

>> Experience Layer APIs are modeled and designed exclusively for the end user's experience. So, the data models of experience layer vary based on the nature and type of such API consumer. For example, Mobile consumers will need light-weight data models to transfer with ease on the wire, where as web-based consumers will need detailed data models to render most of the info on web pages, so on. So, enterprise data models fit for the purpose of canonical models but not of good use for experience APIs.

>> That is why, EDMs should be used extensively in process and system tiers but NOT in experience tier.

Understanding API-led Connectivity Layers:

In MuleSoft’s API-led connectivity approach, APIs are categorized into three layers:

Experience Layer: This layer is responsible for providing data to the end-user applications and is often customized to meet the needs of different user interfaces.

Process Layer: This layer is used to orchestrate and combine data from multiple System APIs. It acts as a mediator and business logic layer without directly interacting with the backend systems.

System Layer: This layer provides direct access to the backend systems (e.g., databases, ERPs) and is usually focused on exposing atomic data operations.

Evaluating the Architectural Constraints:

Option A: Always using a strict tiered approach by creating exactly one API per layer is not necessarily an architectural constraint of API-led connectivity. While a layered approach is recommended, it is common to have multiple APIs in each layer as needed for different functionalities.

Option B (Correct Answer): In API-led connectivity, Process APIs are generally responsible for orchestrating calls to System APIs and should not call other Process APIs. This maintains a clear separation of concerns, ensuring that Process APIs aggregate data from System APIs only and provide it to Experience APIs.

Option C: System APIs are generally designed to provide only the necessary data to meet current business requirements. Allowing them to return extra data that is not needed by Process or Experience APIs is not a best practice, as it can lead to inefficiencies.

Option D: Customizations specific to end-user applications are typically handled at the Experience Layer rather than the Process Layer, as the Experience Layer is intended to tailor the data to fit the needs of each specific client or front-end application.

Conclusion:

Option B is the correct answer as it aligns with the API-led connectivity principles. In this architectural style, Process APIs should orchestrate System APIs but should avoid interacting with other Process APIs to keep a clear separation of responsibilities across the layers.

For additional details, refer to MuleSoft documentation on API-led connectivity best practices, particularly around the roles of each layer in API orchestration and data handling.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Unit tests (Whitebox)

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

Explanation

Correct Answer: The credentials provided by the IdP for identity management

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

Explanation

Correct Answer: The visibility level of the API instances of that API that need to be publicly accessible should be set to public visibility.

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

To create a unified schema in MuleSoft's DataGraph, APIs must be exposed in a way that allows DataGraph to pull and consolidate data from these APIs into a single schema accessible to consumers. DataGraph provides a federated approach, combining multiple APIs to form a single, unified API endpoint.

In this setup:

APIs 1, 2, 3, and 4 are suitable candidates for DataGraph because they are hosted within the Customer VPC on CloudHub and are accessible either through a Shared Load Balancer (LB) or a Dedicated Load Balancer (DLB). Both of these load balancers provide public access, which is a necessary condition for DataGraph as it must access the APIs to aggregate data.

APIs 5 and 6 are hosted on Customer Hosted Server 2, which is explicitly marked as "Not public". Since DataGraph requires API access through a publicly reachable endpoint to aggregate them into a unified schema, APIs 5 and 6 cannot be used with DataGraph in this configuration.

APIs 3 and 4 on Customer Hosted Server 1 appear accessible through a Shared LB, implying public accessibility that meets DataGraph’s requirements.

By combining APIs 1, 2, 3, and 4 within DataGraph, you can create a unified schema that enables clients to query data seamlessly from all these APIs as if it were from a single source.

This setup allows for efficient data retrieval and can simplify API consumption by reducing the need to call multiple APIs individually, thus optimizing performance and developer experience.

ReferencesFor more detailed information on setting up and managing unified schemas in DataGraph, refer to the DataWeave documentation and MuleSoft DataGraph resources which provide in-depth guidelines on schema aggregation and API federation​​.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Use a combination of CloudHub-deployed and manually provisioned on-premises 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 on-premises Mule runtimes managed by the MuleSoft-hosted Platform control plane.

Explanation

Correct Answer: It makes API Manager aware of API implementations and hence enables it to enforce policies.

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

>> API Autodiscovery is a mechanism that manages an API from API Manager by pairing the deployed application to an API created on the platform.

>> API Management includes tracking, enforcing policies if you apply any, and reporting API analytics.

>> Critical to the Autodiscovery process is identifying the API by providing the API name and version.

References:

ept

When defining data models for System APIs without an established Enterprise Data Model, MuleSoft recommends mirroring the back-end systems' data types to achieve quick and effective integration without adding complexity. This approach has several benefits:

Alignment with Backend Systems:

Mirroring data types ensures consistency with backend data sources, which simplifies integration, reduces mapping requirements, and minimizes potential data transformation issues.

Flexibility for Future Enhancements:

By retaining close alignment with backend data structures, System APIs can evolve to support an Enterprise Data Model in the future without immediate restructuring.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option A (exposing misspellings) is not recommended as System APIs should still ensure a professional and coherent interface.

Option C (custom naming) complicates the API structure without adding immediate value in the absence of a clear data model.

Option D (exposing all fields) is unnecessary and can reduce performance and add complexity.

ReferencesRefer to MuleSoft best practices for data modeling in System APIs for additional information on mirroring backend systems​.

Understanding Control and Runtime Planes:

Control Plane: The control plane is responsible for managing, monitoring, and deploying Mule applications. In a Private Cloud Edition (PCE), this control plane is deployed on-premises within the customer’s infrastructure, meeting data residency and security requirements.

Runtime Plane: The runtime plane consists of Mule runtimes that execute Mule applications. By hosting these runtimes within the customer’s infrastructure, data and metadata can remain local, which complies with corporate policies regarding data residency.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A: Using Anypoint Platform Private Cloud Edition for the control plane and the MuleSoft-hosted runtime plane would not meet the requirement, as the runtime plane is hosted by MuleSoft and would not keep data local.

Option B: The MuleSoft-hosted control plane with Anypoint Runtime Fabric for the runtime plane would still mean that metadata is managed in MuleSoft’s cloud, which does not comply with the requirement to keep data and metadata on-premises.

Option C: A MuleSoft-hosted control plane and customer-hosted Mule runtimes also mean that metadata resides in the cloud, not on-premises, failing the residency requirement.

Option D (Correct Answer): Anypoint Platform Private Cloud Edition (PCE) for the control plane and customer-hosted Mule runtimes fulfill both requirements, as both the control plane and runtime plane would be hosted within the customer’s data center.

Conclusion:

Option D is the correct answer, as it ensures that both the control plane and runtime plane are hosted on-premises, allowing data and metadata to reside locally per the corporate IT policy.

Refer to MuleSoft's documentation on Private Cloud Edition deployment and on-premise runtime configurations for further details.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Traffic between Mule applications deployed to an Anypoint VPC and on-premises systems can stay within a private network

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

>> The private IP address range of an Anypoint VPC is NOT automatically chosen by CloudHub. It is chosen by us at the time of creating VPC using thr CIDR blocks.

CIDR Block: The size of the Anypoint VPC in Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) notation.

For example, if you set it to 10.111.0.0/24, the Anypoint VPC is granted 256 IP addresses from 10.111.0.0 to 10.111.0.255.

Ideally, the CIDR Blocks you choose for the Anypoint VPC come from a private IP space, and should not overlap with any other Anypoint VPC’s CIDR Blocks, or any CIDR Blocks in use in your corporate network.

that each CloudHub environment requires a separate Anypoint VPC. Once an Anypoint VPC is created, we can choose a same VPC by multiple environments. However, it is generally a best and recommended practice to always have seperate Anypoint VPCs for Non-Prod and Prod environments.

>> We use Anypoint VPN to link the underlying AWS VPC to an on-premises (non AWS) private network. NOT VPC Peering.