Biography

ACD301受験対策書 & ACD301過去問無料

競争がますます激しいIT業種では、AppianのACD301試験の認定は欠くことができない認証です。Fast2testを選んだら、君が一回でAppianのACD301認定試験に合格するのを保証します。もしFast2testのAppianのACD301試験トレーニング資料を購入した後、学習教材は問題があれば、或いは試験に不合格になる場合は、私たちが全額返金することを保証いたします。

Appian ACD301 認定試験の出題範囲：

トピック
出題範囲

トピック 1

• Extending Appian: This section of the exam measures skills of Integration Specialists and covers building and troubleshooting advanced integrations using connected systems and APIs. Candidates are expected to work with authentication, evaluate plug-ins, develop custom solutions when needed, and utilize document generation options to extend the platform’s capabilities.

トピック 2

• Platform Management: This section of the exam measures skills of Appian System Administrators and covers the ability to manage platform operations such as deploying applications across environments, troubleshooting platform-level issues, configuring environment settings, and understanding platform architecture. Candidates are also expected to know when to involve Appian Support and how to adjust admin console configurations to maintain stability and performance.

トピック 3

• Application Design and Development: This section of the exam measures skills of Lead Appian Developers and covers the design and development of applications that meet user needs using Appian functionality. It includes designing for consistency, reusability, and collaboration across teams. Emphasis is placed on applying best practices for building multiple, scalable applications in complex environments.

トピック 4

• 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.

トピック 5

• 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.

>> ACD301受験対策書 <<

ACD301 Appian Lead Developer練習テスト、ACD301試験問題集

Fast2testの助けのもとで君は大量のお金と時間を费やさなくても復楽にAppianのACD301認定試験に合格のは大丈夫でしょう。ソフトの問題集はFast2testが実際問題によって、テストの問題と解答を分析して出来上がりました。Fast2testが提供したAppianのACD301の問題集は真実の試験に緊密な相似性があります。

Appian Lead Developer 認定 ACD301 試験問題 (Q20-Q25):

質問 # 20
You need to connect Appian with LinkedIn to retrieve personal information about the users in your application. This information is considered private, and users should allow Appian to retrieve their information. Which authentication method would you recommend to fulfill this request?

• A. API Key Authentication
• B. OAuth 2.0: Authorization Code Grant
• C. Basic Authentication with user's login information
• D. Basic Authentication with dedicated account's login information

正解：B

解説：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:As an Appian Lead Developer, integrating with an external system like LinkedIn to retrieve private user information requires a secure, user-consented authentication method that aligns with Appian's capabilities and industry standards. The requirement specifies that users must explicitly allow Appian to access their private data, which rules out methods that don't involve user authorization. Let's evaluate each option based on Appian's official documentation and LinkedIn's API requirements:
* A. API Key Authentication:API Key Authentication involves using a single static key to authenticate requests. While Appian supports this method via Connected Systems (e.g., HTTP Connected System with an API key header), it's unsuitable here. API keys authenticate the application, not the user, and don't provide a mechanism for individual user consent. LinkedIn's API for private data (e.g., profile information) requires per-user authorization, which API keys cannot facilitate. Appian documentation notes that API keys are best for server-to-server communication without user context, making this option inadequate for the requirement.
* B. Basic Authentication with user's login information:This method uses a username and password (typically base64-encoded) provided by each user. In Appian, Basic Authentication is supported in Connected Systems, but applying it here would require users to input their LinkedIn credentials directly into Appian. This is insecure, impractical, and against LinkedIn's security policies, as it exposes user passwords to the application. Appian Lead Developer best practices discourage storing or handling user credentials directly due to security risks (e.g., credential leakage) and maintenance challenges.
Moreover, LinkedIn's API doesn't support Basic Authentication for user-specific data access-it requires OAuth 2.0. This option is not viable.
* C. Basic Authentication with dedicated account's login information:This involves using a single, dedicated LinkedIn account's credentials to authenticate all requests. While technically feasible in Appian's Connected System (using Basic Authentication), it fails to meet the requirement that "users should allow Appian to retrieve their information." A dedicated account would access data on behalf of all users without their individual consent, violating privacy principles and LinkedIn's API terms.
LinkedIn restricts such approaches, requiring user-specific authorization for private data. Appian documentation advises against blanket credentials for user-specific integrations, making this option inappropriate.
* D. OAuth 2.0: Authorization Code Grant:This is the recommended choice. OAuth 2.0 Authorization Code Grant, supported natively in Appian's Connected System framework, is designed for scenarios where users must authorize an application (Appian) to access their private data on a third-party service (LinkedIn). In this flow, Appian redirects users to LinkedIn's authorization page, where they grant permission. Upon approval, LinkedIn returns an authorization code, which Appian exchanges for an access token via the Token Request Endpoint. This token enables Appian to retrieve private user data (e.
g., profile details) securely and per user. Appian's documentation explicitly recommends this method for integrations requiring user consent, such as LinkedIn, and provides tools like a!authorizationLink() to handle authorization failures gracefully. LinkedIn's API (e.g., v2 API) mandates OAuth 2.0 for personal data access, aligning perfectly with this approach.
Conclusion: OAuth 2.0: Authorization Code Grant (D) is the best method. It ensures user consent, complies with LinkedIn's API requirements, and leverages Appian's secure integration capabilities. In practice, you'd configure a Connected System in Appian with LinkedIn's Client ID, Client Secret, Authorization Endpoint (e.
g., https://www.linkedin.com/oauth/v2/authorization), and Token Request Endpoint (e.g., https://www.
linkedin.com/oauth/v2/accessToken), then use an Integration object to call LinkedIn APIs with the access token. This solution is scalable, secure, and aligns with Appian Lead Developer certification standards for third-party integrations.
References:
* Appian Documentation: "Setting Up a Connected System with the OAuth 2.0 Authorization Code Grant" (Connected Systems).
* Appian Lead Developer Certification: Integration Module (OAuth 2.0 Configuration and Best Practices).
* LinkedIn Developer Documentation: "OAuth 2.0 Authorization Code Flow" (API Authentication Requirements).

質問 # 21
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. site_id
• B. modified_date
• C. name
• D. case_id
• E. priority
• F. status

正解：A、E、F

解説：
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 Reference: 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.
Reference:
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).

質問 # 22
What are two advantages of having High Availability (HA) for Appian Cloud applications?

• A. In the event of a system failure, your Appian instance will be restored and available to your users in less than 15 minutes, having lost no more than the last 1 minute worth of data.
• B. A typical Appian Cloud HA instance is composed of two active nodes.
• C. Data and transactions are continuously replicated across the active nodes to achieve redundancy and avoid single points of failure.
• D. An Appian Cloud HA instance is composed of multiple active nodes running in different availability zones in different regions.

正解：A、C

解説：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:High Availability (HA) in Appian Cloud is designed to ensure that applications remain operational and data integrity is maintained even in the face of hardware failures, network issues, or other disruptions. Appian's Cloud Architecture and HA documentation outline the benefits, focusing on redundancy, minimal downtime, and data protection. The question asks for two advantages, and the options must align with these core principles.
* Option B (Data and transactions are continuously replicated across the active nodes to achieve redundancy and avoid single points of failure):This is a key advantage of HA. Appian Cloud HA instances use multiple active nodes to replicate data and transactions in real-time across the cluster. This redundancy ensures that if one node fails, others can take over without data loss, eliminating single points of failure. This is a fundamental feature of Appian's HA setup, leveraging distributed architecture to enhance reliability, as detailed in the Appian Cloud High Availability Guide.
* Option D (In the event of a system failure, your Appian instance will be restored and available to your users in less than 15 minutes, having lost no more than the last 1 minute worth of data):This is another significant advantage. Appian Cloud HA is engineered to provide rapid recovery and minimal data loss. The Service Level Agreement (SLA) and HA documentation specify that in the case of a failure, the system failover is designed to complete within a short timeframe (typically under 15 minutes), with data loss limited to the last minute due to synchronous replication. This ensures business continuity and meets stringent uptime and data integrity requirements.
* Option A (An Appian Cloud HA instance is composed of multiple active nodes running in different availability zones in different regions):This is a description of the HA architecture rather than an advantage. While running nodes across different availability zones and regions enhances fault tolerance, the benefit is the resulting redundancy and availability, which are captured in Options B and D: This option is more about implementation than a direct user or operational advantage.
* Option C (A typical Appian Cloud HA instance is composed of two active nodes):This is a factual statement about the architecture but not an advantage. The number of nodes (typically two or more, depending on configuration) is a design detail, not a benefit. The advantage lies in what this setup enables (e.g., redundancy and quick recovery), as covered by B and D.
The two advantages-continuous replication for redundancy (B) and fast recovery with minimal data loss (D)
-reflect the primary value propositions of Appian Cloud HA, ensuring both operational resilience and data integrity for users.
References:Appian Documentation - Appian Cloud High Availability Guide, Appian Cloud Service Level Agreement (SLA), Appian Lead Developer Training - Cloud Architecture.
The two advantages of having High Availability (HA) for Appian Cloud applications are:
* B. Data and transactions are continuously replicated across the active nodes to achieve redundancy and avoid single points of failure. This is an advantage of having HA, as it ensures that there is always a backup copy of data and transactions in case one of the nodes fails or becomes unavailable. This also improves data integrity and consistency across the nodes, as any changes made to one node are automatically propagated to the other node.
* D. In the event of a system failure, your Appian instance will be restored and available to your users in less than 15 minutes, having lost no more than the last 1 minute worth of data. This is an advantage of having HA, as it guarantees a high level of service availability and reliability for your Appian instance.
If one of the nodes fails or becomes unavailable, the other node will take over and continue to serve requests without any noticeable downtime or data loss for your users.
The other options are incorrect for the following reasons:
* A. An Appian Cloud HA instance is composed of multiple active nodes running in different availability zones in different regions. This is not an advantage of having HA, but rather a description of how HA works in Appian Cloud. An Appian Cloud HA instance consists of two active nodes running in different availability zones within the same region, not different regions.
* C. A typical Appian Cloud HA instance is composed of two active nodes. This is not an advantage of having HA, but rather a description of how HA works in Appian Cloud. A typical Appian Cloud HA instance consists of two active nodes running in different availability zones within the same region, but this does not necessarily provide any benefit over having one active node. Verified References: Appian Documentation, section "High Availability".

質問 # 23
The business database for a large, complex Appian application is to undergo a migration between database technologies, as well as interface and process changes. The project manager asks you to recommend a test strategy. Given the changes, which two items should be included in the test strategy?

• A. Penetration testing of the Appian platform
• B. Tests that ensure users can still successfully log into the platform
• C. A regression test of all existing system functionality
• D. Tests for each of the interfaces and process changes
• E. Internationalization testing of the Appian platform

正解：C、D

解説：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:As an Appian Lead Developer, recommending a test strategy for a large, complex application undergoing a database migration (e.g., from Oracle to PostgreSQL) and interface/process changes requires focusing on ensuring system stability, functionality, and the specific updates. The strategy must address risks tied to the scope-database technology shift, interface modifications, and process updates-while aligning with Appian's testing best practices. Let's evaluate each option:
* A. Internationalization testing of the Appian platform:Internationalization testing verifies that the application supports multiple languages, locales, and formats (e.g., date formats). While valuable for global applications, the scenario doesn't indicate a change in localization requirements tied to the database migration, interfaces, or processes. Appian's platform handles internationalization natively (e.
g., via locale settings), and this isn't impacted by database technology or UI/process changes unless explicitly stated. This is out of scope for the given context and not a priority.
* B. A regression test of all existing system functionality:This is a critical inclusion. A database migration between technologies can affect data integrity, queries (e.g., a!queryEntity), and performance due to differences in SQL dialects, indexing, or drivers. Regression testing ensures that all existing functionality-records, reports, processes, and integrations-works as expected post-migration. Appian Lead Developer documentation mandates regression testing for significant infrastructure changes like this, as unmapped edge cases (e.g., datatype mismatches) could break the application. Given the "large, complex" nature, full-system validation is essential to catch unintended impacts.
* C. Penetration testing of the Appian platform:Penetration testing assesses security vulnerabilities (e.g., injection attacks). While security is important, the changes described-database migration, interface, and process updates-don't inherently alter Appian's security model (e.g., authentication, encryption), which is managed at the platform level. Appian's cloud or on-premise security isn't directly tied to database technology unless new vulnerabilities are introduced (not indicated here). This is a periodic concern, not specific to this migration, making it less relevant than functional validation.
* D. Tests for each of the interfaces and process changes:This is also essential. The project includes explicit "interface and process changes" alongside the migration. Interface updates (e.g., SAIL forms) might rely on new data structures or queries, while process changes (e.g., modified process models) could involve updated nodes or logic. Testing each change ensures these components function correctly with the new database and meet business requirements. Appian's testing guidelines emphasize targeted validation of modified components to confirm they integrate with the migrated data layer, making this a primary focus of the strategy.
* E. Tests that ensure users can still successfully log into the platform:Login testing verifies authentication (e.g., SSO, LDAP), typically managed by Appian's security layer, not the business database. A database migration affects application data, not user authentication, unless the database stores user credentials (uncommon in Appian, which uses separate identity management). While a quick sanity check, it's narrow and subsumed by broader regression testing (B), making it redundant as a standalone item.
Conclusion: The two key items are B (regression test of all existing system functionality) and D (tests for each of the interfaces and process changes). Regression testing (B) ensures the database migration doesn't disrupt the entire application, while targeted testing (D) validates the specific interface and process updates. Together, they cover the full scope-existing stability and new functionality-aligning with Appian's recommended approach for complex migrations and modifications.
References:
* Appian Documentation: "Testing Best Practices" (Regression and Component Testing).
* Appian Lead Developer Certification: Application Maintenance Module (Database Migration Strategies).
* Appian Best Practices: "Managing Large-Scale Changes in Appian" (Test Planning).

質問 # 24
For each requirement, match the most appropriate approach to creating or utilizing plug-ins Each approach will be used once.
Note: To change your responses, you may deselect your response by clicking the blank space at the top of the selection list.

正解：

解説：

質問 # 25
......

ACD301試験問題の最大の利点は、時間と市場の試練に耐えることです。それは、誠実で温かいサービスです。受験者がACD301試験に合格できるように、完璧な製品とサービスシステムを確立しています。対応する製品とサービスをお楽しみいただける、適切で満足のいくACD301試験問題を提供できます。絶対に100％良いとは言えませんが、すべての顧客にサービスを提供するために最善を尽くしています。このようにして初めて、顧客を維持し、長期的な協力パートナーになれます。 ACD301テストガイドへの転送をお試しください。

ACD301過去問無料: https://jp.fast2test.com/ACD301-premium-file.html

• ACD301基礎問題集 🐶 ACD301トレーニング 💈 ACD301最新対策問題 📼 ウェブサイト【 www.jpexam.com 】を開き、☀ ACD301 ️☀️を検索して無料でダウンロードしてくださいACD301復習過去問
• 高品質なACD301受験対策書一回合格-検証するACD301過去問無料 🚊 最新⇛ ACD301 ⇚問題集ファイルは⇛ www.goshiken.com ⇚にて検索ACD301専門知識内容
• 試験の準備方法-正確的なACD301受験対策書試験-認定するACD301過去問無料 📬 今すぐ《 www.japancert.com 》で☀ ACD301 ️☀️を検索して、無料でダウンロードしてくださいACD301トレーニング
• 試験の準備方法-正確的なACD301受験対策書試験-認定するACD301過去問無料 🟤 ▷ www.goshiken.com ◁にて限定無料の▷ ACD301 ◁問題集をダウンロードせよACD301独学書籍
• ACD301独学書籍 👶 ACD301ソフトウエア 🏁 ACD301最新対策問題 🥝 ➥ www.japancert.com 🡄サイトで“ ACD301 ”の最新問題が使えるACD301復習過去問
• ACD301合格率 🛒 ACD301最新対策問題 🔳 ACD301模擬問題 🏺 検索するだけで⇛ www.goshiken.com ⇚から{ ACD301 }を無料でダウンロードACD301試験
• 検証するACD301受験対策書試験-試験の準備方法-最新のACD301過去問無料 😏 Open Webサイト“ www.it-passports.com ”検索➽ ACD301 🢪無料ダウンロードACD301試験
• 試験の準備方法-更新するACD301受験対策書試験-最高のACD301過去問無料 🩳 ➥ www.goshiken.com 🡄を入力して▶ ACD301 ◀を検索し、無料でダウンロードしてくださいACD301勉強ガイド
• ACD301基礎問題集 🔈 ACD301最新対策問題 🧈 ACD301問題例 🎱 最新✔ ACD301 ️✔️問題集ファイルは➠ www.passtest.jp 🠰にて検索ACD301テスト対策書
• Appian ACD301試験の準備方法｜実際的なACD301受験対策書試験｜ハイパスレートのAppian Lead Developer過去問無料 🤼 ➥ www.goshiken.com 🡄に移動し、【 ACD301 】を検索して無料でダウンロードしてくださいACD301無料過去問
• ACD301日本語試験情報 ⬜ ACD301無料過去問 🐦 ACD301勉強ガイド 🔽 ▛ www.pass4test.jp ▟から➤ ACD301 ⮘を検索して、試験資料を無料でダウンロードしてくださいACD301基礎問題集
• pct.edu.pk, nerd-training.com, lms.ait.edu.za, techwitsclan.com, study.stcs.edu.np, dbpowerhacks.online, www.eduenloja.ca, bbs.yongrenqianyou.com, motionentrance.edu.np, mahademy.com