Northern Trail Outfitters is planning to perform nightly batch loads into Salesforce from an external system with a custom Java application using the Bulk API. The CIO is curious about monitoring recommendations for the jobs from the technical architect. Which recommendation should help meet the requirements?
Correct Answer: A
For high-volume data loads using the Bulk API, monitoring should be performed programmatically by the orchestrating client-in this case, the custom Java application. The Bulk API is asynchronous, meaning that when you submit a job, Salesforce acknowledges the request and processes it in the background. The Java application must actively track the state of its own jobs. Using the `getBatchInfo` (or `getJobInfo` in Bulk API 2.0) method allows the application to retrieve the real-time status of each batch. The application can check for statuses such as `Queued`, `InProgress`, `Completed`, or `Failed`. Once a batch is marked as `Completed`, the application can then call `getBatchResult` to retrieve a list of successes and failures for individual records. Option B is architecturally unsound because Bulk API operations are designed to bypass most synchronous Apex logic to ensure performance; furthermore, creating custom records for every error in a "nightly batch load" would likely hit other platform limits (like storage or CPU) and defeat the purpose of using the Bulk API. Option C is ineffective for Bulk API monitoring, as debug logs do not capture the background processing of bulk batches and would quickly hit the log size limits. By recommending Option A, the architect ensures that the Java application maintains full control over the integration lifecycle. The application can log errors locally, implement automated retries for transient failures, and provide the CIO with accurate, high-level reporting on the success rate of the nightly loads without placing unnecessary overhead on the Salesforce platform. ---
Question 107
Northern TrailOutfitters has a requirement to encrypt few of widely used standard fields. They also want to be able to use these fields in workflow rules. Which security solution should an Integration Architect recommend to fulfill the business use case?
Correct Answer: D
Option D is correct because Platform Shield Encryption allows you to encrypt standard fields and use them in workflow rules. Platform Shield Encryption uses AES 256-bit encryption to protect sensitive data atrest, while preserving platform functionality12 Option A is incorrect because Cryptography Class is a set of Apex methods for creating digests, message authentication codes, signatures, and encryption. It does not provide a way to encrypt standard fields or use them in workflow rules3 Option B is incorrect because Data Masking is a feature that replaces sensitive data in sandboxes with dummy data. It does not encrypt data in production or allow the use of encrypted data in workflow rules45 Option C is incorrect because Classic Encryption is a feature that encrypts custom fields with 128-bit AES encryption. It does not support standard fields or workflow rules67 References: 1: Salesforce Shield - Data Monitoring & End to End Encryption 2: How Shield Platform EncryptionWorks 3: Crypto Class 4: Data Masking - Anonymize Sensitive Data 5: Secure Your SandboxData with Salesforce Data Mask 6: What's the Difference Between Classic Encryption and Shield Platform Encryption? 7: Salesforce Classic vs. Salesforce Shield PlatformEncryption: Which One Do You Need?
