Biography

ACD301시험패스가능공부자료100%유효한최신덤프자료

아무런 노력을 하지 않고 승진이나 연봉인상을 꿈꾸고 있는 분이라면 이 글을 검색해낼수 없었을것입니다. 승진이나 연봉인상을 꿈꾸면 승진과 연봉인상을 시켜주는 회사에 능력을 과시해야 합니다. IT인증시험은 국제적으로 승인해주는 자격증을 취득하는 시험입니다. Fast2test의Appian인증 ACD301덤프의 도움으로 Appian인증 ACD301시험을 패스하여 자격증을 취득하면 승진이나 연봉인상의 꿈이 이루어집니다. 결코 꿈은 이루어질것입니다.

Appian ACD301 시험요강:

주제	소개
주제 1	Proactively Design for Scalability and Performance: This section of the exam measures skills of Application Performance Engineers and covers building scalable applications and optimizing Appian components for performance. It includes planning load testing, diagnosing performance issues at the application level, and designing systems that can grow efficiently without sacrificing reliability.
주제 2	Data Management: This section of the exam measures skills of Data Architects and covers analyzing, designing, and securing data models. Candidates must demonstrate an understanding of how to use Appian’s data fabric and manage data migrations. The focus is on ensuring performance in high-volume data environments, solving data-related issues, and implementing advanced database features effectively.
주제 3	Project and Resource Management: This section of the exam measures skills of Agile Project Leads and covers interpreting business requirements, recommending design options, and leading Agile teams through technical delivery. It also involves governance, and process standardization.

 

>> ACD301시험패스 가능 공부자료 <<

Appian ACD301최신버전 덤프샘플 다운 & ACD301인증시험공부

Appian ACD301인증덤프는 실제 ACD301시험의 가장 최근 시험의 기출문제를 기준으로 하여 만들어진 최고품질을 자랑하는 최고적중율의 시험대비자료입니다. 저희 ACD301덤프로 ACD301시험에 도전해보지 않으실래요? ACD301시험에서 불합격 받을시 덤프비용은 환불해드리기에 부담없이 구매하셔도 됩니다.환불의 유일한 기준은 불합격 성적표이고 환불유효기간은 구매일로부터 60일까지입니다.

최신 Lead Developer ACD301 무료샘플문제 (Q12-Q17):

질문 # 12
You are developing a case management application to manage support cases for a large set of sites. One of the tabs in this application s site Is a record grid of cases, along with Information about the site corresponding to that case. Users must be able to filter cases by priority level and status.
You decide to create a view as the source of your entity-backed record, which joins the separate case/site tables (as depicted in the following Image).

Which three column should be indexed?

• A. status
• B. site_id
• C. name
• D. case_id
• E. priority
• F. modified_date

정답：A,B,E

설명：
Indexing columns can improve the performance of queries that use those columns in filters, joins, or order by clauses. In this case, the columns that should be indexed are site_id, status, and priority, because they are used for filtering or joining the tables. Site_id is used to join the case and site tables, so indexing it will speed up the join operation. Status and priority are used to filter the cases by the user's input, so indexing them will reduce the number of rows that need to be scanned. Name, modified_date, and case_id do not need to be indexed, because they are not used for filtering or joining. Name and modified_date are only used for displaying information in the record grid, and case_id is only used as a unique identifier for each record.
Verified References: Appian Records Tutorial, Appian Best Practices
As an Appian Lead Developer, optimizing a database view for an entity-backed record grid requires indexing columns frequently used in queries, particularly for filtering and joining. The scenario involves a record grid displaying cases with site information, filtered by "priority level" and "status," and joined via the site_id foreign key. The image shows two tables (site and case) with a relationship via site_id. Let's evaluate each column based on Appian's performance best practices and query patterns:
* A. site_id:This is a primary key in the site table and a foreign key in the case table, used for joining the tables in the view. Indexing site_id in the case table (and ensuring it's indexed in site as a PK) optimizes JOIN operations, reducing query execution time for the record grid. Appian's documentation recommends indexing foreign keys in large datasets to improve query performance, especially for entity-backed records. This is critical for the join and must be included.
* B. status:Users filter cases by "status" (a varchar column in the case table). Indexing status speeds up filtering queries (e.g., WHERE status = 'Open') in the record grid, particularly with large datasets.
Appian emphasizes indexing columns used in WHERE clauses or filters to enhance performance, making this a key column for optimization. Since status is a common filter, it's essential.
* C. name:This is a varchar column in the site table, likely used for display (e.g., site name in the grid).
However, the scenario doesn't mention filtering or sorting by name, and it's not part of the join or required filters. Indexing name could improve searches if used, but it's not a priority given the focus on priority and status filters. Appian advises indexing only frequently queried or filtered columns to avoid unnecessary overhead, so this isn't necessary here.
* D. modified_date:This is a date column in the case table, tracking when cases were last updated. While useful for sorting or historical queries, the scenario doesn't specify filtering or sorting by modified_date in the record grid. Indexing it could help if used, but it's not critical for the current requirements.
Appian's performance guidelines prioritize indexing columns in active filters, making this lower priority than site_id, status, and priority.
* E. priority:Users filter cases by "priority level" (a varchar column in the case table). Indexing priority optimizes filtering queries (e.g., WHERE priority = 'High') in the record grid, similar to status. Appian' s documentation highlights indexing columns used in WHERE clauses for entity-backed records, especially with large datasets. Since priority is a specified filter, it's essential to include.
* F. case_id:This is the primary key in the case table, already indexed by default (as PKs are automatically indexed in most databases). Indexing it again is redundant and unnecessary, as Appian's Data Store configuration relies on PKs for unique identification but doesn't require additional indexing for performance in this context. The focus is on join and filter columns, not the PK itself.
Conclusion: The three columns to index are A (site_id), B (status), and E (priority). These optimize the JOIN (site_id) and filter performance (status, priority) for the record grid, aligning with Appian's recommendations for entity-backed records and large datasets. Indexing these columns ensures efficient querying for user filters, critical for the application's performance.
References:
* Appian Documentation: "Performance Best Practices for Data Stores" (Indexing Strategies).
* Appian Lead Developer Certification: Data Management Module (Optimizing Entity-Backed Records).
* Appian Best Practices: "Working with Large Data Volumes" (Indexing for Query Performance).

 

질문 # 13
You have an active development team (Team A) building enhancements for an application (App X) and are currently using the TEST environment for User Acceptance Testing (UAT).
A separate operations team (Team B) discovers a critical error in the Production instance of App X that they must remediate. However, Team B does not have a hotfix stream for which to accomplish this. The available environments are DEV, TEST, and PROD.
Which risk mitigation effort should both teams employ to ensure Team A's capital project is only minorly interrupted, and Team B's critical fix can be completed and deployed quickly to end users?

• A. Team B must address changes in the TEST environment. These changes can then be tested and deployed directly to PROD. Once the deployment is complete, Team B can then communicate their changes to Team A to ensure they are incorporated as part of the next release.
• B. Team A must analyze their current codebase in DEV to merge the hotfix changes into their latest enhancements. Team B is then required to wait for the hotfix to follow regular deployment protocols from DEV to the PROD environment.
• C. Team B must address the changes directly in PROD. As there is no hotfix stream, and DEV and TEST are being utilized for active development, it is best to avoid a conflict of components. Once Team A has completed their enhancements work, Team B can update DEV and TEST accordingly.
• D. Team B must communicate to Team A which component will be addressed in the hotfix to avoid overlap of changes. If overlap exists, the component must be versioned to its PROD state before being remediated and deployed, and then versioned back to its latest development state. If overlap does not exist, the component may be remediated and deployed without any version changes.

정답：D

설명：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:As an Appian Lead Developer, managing concurrent development and operations (hotfix) activities across limited environments (DEV, TEST, PROD) requires minimizing disruption to Team A's enhancements while ensuring Team B's critical fix reaches PROD quickly. The scenario highlights nohotfix stream, active UAT in TEST, and a critical PROD issue, necessitating a strategic approach. Let's evaluate each option:
* A. Team B must communicate to Team A which component will be addressed in the hotfix to avoid overlap of changes. If overlap exists, the component must be versioned to its PROD state before being remediated and deployed, and then versioned back to its latest development state. If overlap does not exist, the component may be remediated and deployed without any version changes:This is the best approach. It ensures collaboration between teams to prevent conflicts, leveraging Appian's version control (e.g., object versioning in Appian Designer). Team B identifies the critical component, checks for overlap with Team A's work, and uses versioning to isolate changes. If no overlap exists, the hotfix deploys directly; if overlap occurs, versioning preserves Team A's work, allowing the hotfix to deploy and then reverting the component for Team A's continuation. This minimizes interruption to Team A's UAT, enables rapid PROD deployment, and aligns with Appian's change management best practices.
* B. Team A must analyze their current codebase in DEV to merge the hotfix changes into their latest enhancements. Team B is then required to wait for the hotfix to follow regular deployment protocols from DEV to the PROD environment:This delays Team B's critical fix, as regular deployment (DEV # TEST # PROD) could take weeks, violating the need for "quick deployment to end users." It also risks introducing Team A's untested enhancements into the hotfix, potentially destabilizing PROD. Appian's documentation discourages mixing development and hotfix workflows, favoring isolated changes for urgent fixes, making this inefficient and risky.
* C. Team B must address changes in the TEST environment. These changes can then be tested and deployed directly to PROD. Once the deployment is complete, Team B can then communicate their changes to Team A to ensure they are incorporated as part of the next release:Using TEST for hotfix development disrupts Team A's UAT, as TEST is already in use for their enhancements. Direct deployment from TEST to PROD skips DEV validation, increasing risk, and doesn't address overlap with Team A's work. Appian's deployment guidelines emphasize separate streams (e.g., hotfix streams) to avoid such conflicts, making this disruptive and unsafe.
* D. Team B must address the changes directly in PROD. As there is no hotfix stream, and DEV and TEST are being utilized for active development, it is best to avoid a conflict of components. Once Team A has completed their enhancements work, Team B can update DEV and TEST accordingly:Making changes directly in PROD is highly discouraged in Appian due to lack of testing, version control, and rollback capabilities, risking further instability. This violates Appian's Production governance and security policies, and delays Team B's updates until Team A finishes, contradicting the need for a
"quick deployment." Appian's best practices mandate using lower environments for changes, ruling this out.
Conclusion: Team B communicating with Team A, versioning components if needed, and deploying the hotfix (A) is the risk mitigation effort. It ensures minimal interruption to Team A's work, rapid PROD deployment for Team B's fix, and leverages Appian's versioning for safe, controlled changes-aligning with Lead Developer standards for multi-team coordination.
References:
* Appian Documentation: "Managing Production Hotfixes" (Versioning and Change Management).
* Appian Lead Developer Certification: Application Management Module (Hotfix Strategies).
* Appian Best Practices: "Concurrent Development and Operations" (Minimizing Risk in Limited Environments).

 

질문 # 14
You have 5 applications on your Appian platform in Production. Users are now beginning to use multiple applications across the platform, and the client wants to ensure a consistent user experience across all applications.
You notice that some applications use rich text, some use section layouts, and others use box layouts. The result is that each application has a different color and size for the header.
What would you recommend to ensure consistency across the platform?

• A. In each individual application, create a rule that can be used for section headers, and update each application to reference its respective rule.
• B. In the common application, create one rule for each application, and update each application to reference its respective rule.
• C. Create constants for text size and color, and update each section to reference these values.
• D. In the common application, create a rule that can be used across the platform for section headers, and update each application to reference this new rule.

정답：D

설명：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:
As an Appian Lead Developer, ensuring a consistent user experience across multiple applications on the Appian platform involves centralizing reusable components and adhering to Appian's design governance principles. The client's concern about inconsistent headers (e.g., different colors, sizes, layouts) across applications using rich text, section layouts, and box layouts requires a scalable, maintainable solution. Let's evaluate each option:
A . Create constants for text size and color, and update each section to reference these values:
Using constants (e.g., cons!TEXT_SIZE and cons!HEADER_COLOR) is a good practice for managing values, but it doesn't address layout consistency (e.g., rich text vs. section layouts vs. box layouts). Constants alone can't enforce uniform header design across applications, as they don't encapsulate layout logic (e.g., a!sectionLayout() vs. a!richTextDisplayField()). This approach would require manual updates to each application's components, increasing maintenance overhead and still risking inconsistency. Appian's documentation recommends using rules for reusable UI components, not just constants, making this insufficient.
B . In the common application, create a rule that can be used across the platform for section headers, and update each application to reference this new rule:
This is the best recommendation. Appian supports a "common application" (often called a shared or utility application) to store reusable objects like expression rules, which can define consistent header designs (e.g., rule!CommonHeader(size: "LARGE", color: "PRIMARY")). By creating a single rule for headers and referencing it across all 5 applications, you ensure uniformity in layout, color, and size (e.g., using a!sectionLayout() or a!boxLayout() consistently). Appian's design best practices emphasize centralizing UI components in a common application to reduce duplication, enforce standards, and simplify maintenance-perfect for achieving a consistent user experience.
C . In the common application, create one rule for each application, and update each application to reference its respective rule:
This approach creates separate header rules for each application (e.g., rule!App1Header, rule!App2Header), which contradicts the goal of consistency. While housed in the common application, it introduces variability (e.g., different colors or sizes per rule), defeating the purpose. Appian's governance guidelines advocate for a single, shared rule to maintain uniformity, making this less efficient and unnecessary.
D . In each individual application, create a rule that can be used for section headers, and update each application to reference its respective rule:
Creating separate rules in each application (e.g., rule!App1Header in App 1, rule!App2Header in App 2) leads to duplication and inconsistency, as each rule could differ in design. This approach increases maintenance effort and risks diverging styles, violating the client's requirement for a "consistent user experience." Appian's best practices discourage duplicating UI logic, favoring centralized rules in a common application instead.
Conclusion: Creating a rule in the common application for section headers and referencing it across the platform (B) ensures consistency in header design (color, size, layout) while minimizing duplication and maintenance. This leverages Appian's application architecture for shared objects, aligning with Lead Developer standards for UI governance.
Reference:
Appian Documentation: "Designing for Consistency Across Applications" (Common Application Best Practices).
Appian Lead Developer Certification: UI Design Module (Reusable Components and Rules).
Appian Best Practices: "Maintaining User Experience Consistency" (Centralized UI Rules).
The best way to ensure consistency across the platform is to create a rule that can be used across the platform for section headers. This rule can be created in the common application, and then each application can be updated to reference this rule. This will ensure that all of the applications use the same color and size for the header, which will provide a consistent user experience.
The other options are not as effective. Option A, creating constants for text size and color, and updating each section to reference these values, would require updating each section in each application. This would be a lot of work, and it would be easy to make mistakes. Option C, creating one rule for each application, would also require updating each application. This would be less work than option A, but it would still be a lot of work, and it would be easy to make mistakes. Option D, creating a rule in each individual application, would not ensure consistency across the platform. Each application would have its own rule, and the rules could be different. This would not provide a consistent user experience.
Best Practices:
When designing a platform, it is important to consider the user experience. A consistent user experience will make it easier for users to learn and use the platform.
When creating rules, it is important to use them consistently across the platform. This will ensure that the platform has a consistent look and feel.
When updating the platform, it is important to test the changes to ensure that they do not break the user experience.

 

질문 # 15
You are tasked to build a large-scale acquisition application for a prominent customer. The acquisition process tracks the time it takes to fulfill a purchase request with an award.
The customer has structured the contract so that there are multiple application development teams.
How should you design for multiple processes and forms, while minimizing repeated code?

• A. Create a Scrum of Scrums sprint meeting for the team leads.
• B. Create a common objects application.
• C. Create duplicate processes and forms as needed.
• D. Create a Center of Excellence (CoE).

정답：B

설명：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:
As an Appian Lead Developer, designing a large-scale acquisition application with multiple development teams requires a strategy to manage processes, forms, and code reuse effectively. The goal is to minimize repeated code (e.g., duplicate interfaces, process models) while ensuring scalability and maintainability across teams. Let's evaluate each option:
A . Create a Center of Excellence (CoE):
A Center of Excellence is an organizational structure or team focused on standardizing practices, training, and governance across projects. While beneficial for long-term consistency, it doesn't directly address the technical design of minimizing repeated code for processes and forms. It's a strategic initiative, not a design solution, and doesn't solve the immediate need for code reuse. Appian's documentation mentions CoEs for governance but not as a primary design approach, making this less relevant here.
B . Create a common objects application:
This is the best recommendation. In Appian, a "common objects application" (or shared application) is used to store reusable components like expression rules, interfaces, process models, constants, and data types (e.g., CDTs). For a large-scale acquisition application with multiple teams, centralizing shared objects (e.g., rule!CommonForm, pm!CommonProcess) ensures consistency, reduces duplication, and simplifies maintenance. Teams can reference these objects in their applications, adhering to Appian's design best practices for scalability. This approach minimizes repeated code while allowing team-specific customizations, aligning with Lead Developer standards for large projects.
C . Create a Scrum of Scrums sprint meeting for the team leads:
A Scrum of Scrums meeting is a coordination mechanism for Agile teams, focusing on aligning sprint goals and resolving cross-team dependencies. While useful for collaboration, it doesn't address the technical design of minimizing repeated code-it's a process, not a solution for code reuse. Appian's Agile methodologies support such meetings, but they don't directly reduce duplication in processes and forms, making this less applicable.
D . Create duplicate processes and forms as needed:
Duplicating processes and forms (e.g., copying interface!PurchaseForm for each team) leads to redundancy, increased maintenance effort, and potential inconsistencies (e.g., divergent logic). This contradicts the goal of minimizing repeated code and violates Appian's design principles for reusability and efficiency. Appian's documentation strongly discourages duplication, favoring shared objects instead, making this the least effective option.
Conclusion: Creating a common objects application (B) is the recommended design. It centralizes reusable processes, forms, and other components, minimizing code duplication across teams while ensuring consistency and scalability for the large-scale acquisition application. This leverages Appian's application architecture for shared resources, aligning with Lead Developer best practices for multi-team projects.
Reference:
Appian Documentation: "Designing Large-Scale Applications" (Common Application for Reusable Objects).
Appian Lead Developer Certification: Application Design Module (Minimizing Code Duplication).
Appian Best Practices: "Managing Multi-Team Development" (Shared Objects Strategy).
To build a large scale acquisition application for a prominent customer, you should design for multiple processes and forms, while minimizing repeated code. One way to do this is to create a common objects application, which is a shared application that contains reusable components, such as rules, constants, interfaces, integrations, or data types, that can be used by multiple applications. This way, you can avoid duplication and inconsistency of code, and make it easier to maintain and update your applications. You can also use the common objects application to define common standards and best practices for your application development teams, such as naming conventions, coding styles, or documentation guidelines. Verified Reference: [Appian Best Practices], [Appian Design Guidance]

 

질문 # 16
You are required to configure a connection so that Jira can inform Appian when specific tickets change (using a webhook). Which three required steps will allow you to connect both systems?

• A. Create a new API Key and associate a service account.
• B. Give the service account system administrator privileges.
• C. Configure the connection in Jira specifying the URL and credentials.
• D. Create a Web API object and set up the correct security.
• E. Create an integration object from Appian to Jira to periodically check the ticket status.

정답：A,C,D

 

질문 # 17
......

지난 몇년동안 IT산업의 지속적인 발전과 성장을 통해Appian 인증ACD301시험은 IT인증시험중의 이정표로 되어 많은 인기를 누리고 있습니다. IT인증시험을Fast2test덤프로 준비해야만 하는 이유는Fast2test덤프는 IT업계전문가들이 실제시험문제를 연구하여 시험문제에 대비하여 예상문제를 제작했다는 점에 있습니다.

ACD301최신버전 덤프샘플 다운: https://kr.fast2test.com/ACD301-premium-file.html

• ACD301높은 통과율 덤프샘플문제 🦑 ACD301유효한 덤프자료 🟫 ACD301인기시험덤프 📜 ⏩ www.dumptop.com ⏪을(를) 열고[ ACD301 ]를 입력하고 무료 다운로드를 받으십시오ACD301적중율 높은 인증덤프자료
• 시험패스에 유효한 최신버전 ACD301시험패스 가능 공부자료 시험대비자료 🍎 ☀ ACD301 ️☀️를 무료로 다운로드하려면▛ www.itdumpskr.com ▟웹사이트를 입력하세요ACD301최신버전 시험덤프
• ACD301시험패스 가능 공부자료 100% 유효한 시험공부자료 🤛 ⏩ www.itexamdump.com ⏪을 통해 쉽게▷ ACD301 ◁무료 다운로드 받기ACD301인증공부문제
• ACD301합격보장 가능 공부 🍃 ACD301퍼펙트 인증덤프 Ⓜ ACD301합격보장 가능 공부 🐆 ➡ www.itdumpskr.com ️⬅️웹사이트를 열고[ ACD301 ]를 검색하여 무료 다운로드ACD301최신버전 시험덤프
• ACD301최신 업데이트 덤프자료 😎 ACD301인기시험덤프 🐡 ACD301시험덤프데모 🏂 ➥ www.exampassdump.com 🡄웹사이트를 열고【 ACD301 】를 검색하여 무료 다운로드ACD301최신 업데이트 덤프
• ACD301시험패스 가능 공부자료 퍼펙트한 덤프로 시험패스하여 자격증을 취득하기 👫 검색만 하면⇛ www.itdumpskr.com ⇚에서➥ ACD301 🡄무료 다운로드ACD301시험패스 가능한 공부자료
• ACD301시험패스 가능 공부자료최신버전 시험기출문제 ‼ 무료 다운로드를 위해➡ ACD301 ️⬅️를 검색하려면{ www.itdumpskr.com }을(를) 입력하십시오ACD301최신 업데이트 공부자료
• ACD301시험패스 가능 공부자료최신버전 시험기출문제 🥈 무료 다운로드를 위해⮆ ACD301 ⮄를 검색하려면☀ www.itdumpskr.com ️☀️을(를) 입력하십시오ACD301높은 통과율 덤프샘플문제
• ACD301합격보장 가능 공부 🍢 ACD301유효한 인증덤프 😋 ACD301높은 통과율 시험덤프 🛺 ▷ ACD301 ◁를 무료로 다운로드하려면⮆ www.dumptop.com ⮄웹사이트를 입력하세요ACD301인기시험덤프
• ACD301퍼펙트 인증덤프 ✋ ACD301최신 업데이트 덤프자료 🥗 ACD301최신버전 시험덤프 🦢 ☀ www.itdumpskr.com ️☀️을 통해 쉽게➡ ACD301 ️⬅️무료 다운로드 받기ACD301시험덤프데모
• ACD301최신 업데이트 시험덤프 🐨 ACD301적중율 높은 인증덤프자료 📥 ACD301유효한 덤프자료 🏗 오픈 웹 사이트➥ kr.fast2test.com 🡄검색⏩ ACD301 ⏪무료 다운로드ACD301최신 업데이트 시험덤프
• ACD301 Exam Questions
• www.educulture.se learner.thenovavision.com crypto-engineers.com smartmaths.com.ng lionbit.cc eazybioacademy.com themmmarketplace.com thevinegracecoach.com obuka.anaradoyoga.com ar.montazer.co