MuleSoft-Platform-Architect-I Exam Dumps : Salesforce Certified MuleSoft Platform Architect (Mule-Arch-201)

Explanation

Correct Answer: Implement different system APIs named createCustomer, amendCustomer, retrieveCustomer and suspendCustomer as they are modular and has seperation of concerns

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

>> It is quite normal to have a single API and different Verb + Resource combinations. However, this fits well for an Experience API or a Process API but not a best architecture style for System APIs. So, option with just one customerManagement API is not the best choice here.

>> The option with APIs in createCustomerInCRMZ format is next close choice w.r.t modularization and less maintenance but the naming of APIs is directly coupled with the legacy system. A better foreseen approach would be to name your APIs by abstracting the backend system names as it allows seamless replacement/migration of any backend system anytime. So, this is not the correct choice too.

>> createCustomer, amendCustomer, retrieveCustomer and suspendCustomer is the right approach and is the best fit compared to other options as they are both modular and same time got the names decoupled from backend system and it has covered all requirements a System API needs.

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.

In MuleSoft’s ecosystem, when a Process API needs to consume a System API (published to Exchange and protected by OAuth 2.0), the recommended approach is to utilize the REST Connect Connector. Here’s how it aligns with best practices:

Automated Connector Generation:

When a RAML or OAS specification is published in Exchange, MuleSoft automatically generates a REST Connect Connector for that API. This connector simplifies integration as it abstracts the complexity of making HTTP requests and handling OAuth authentication.

Streamlined Integration:

The Process API can import this generated connector from Exchange and configure OAuth credentials, streamlining secure access to the System API without manual HTTP setup.

Why Option C is Correct:

Using the REST Connect Connector directly leverages MuleSoft’s automated tooling, minimizing manual configurations and ensuring a more maintainable integration.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option A (importing an OAuth module) is unnecessary; OAuth is handled within the connector’s configuration.

Option B (property YAML files with HTTP requests) involves manual setup, which is more error-prone and not recommended.

Option D (manually updating POM file) does not directly aid in invoking an API through Exchange.

ReferencesFor more information on using REST Connect Connectors and OAuth integration in MuleSoft, refer to the MuleSoft documentation on API Management and Connectors​​.