Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Adobe AD0-E902 Exam - Topic 3 Question 2 Discussion

A Fusion scenario is triggered by a project status update. The scenario then updates the status, causing repeated execution of the scenario.Which action should a user take to keep this from happening?
B) Create a filter after the instant trigger that only passes records that have not been updated by Fusion
A) When using instant triggers, finish the scenario with the Break directive to prevent the record from being updated again
C) Schedule the instant trigger to only run at intervals to prevent Fusion from thinking the record has been updated after each run

Adobe AD0-E902 Exam - Topic 3 Question 2 Discussion

Actual exam question for Adobe's AD0-E902 exam
Question #: 2
Topic #: 3
[All AD0-E902 Questions]

A Fusion scenario is triggered by a project status update. The scenario then updates the status, causing repeated execution of the scenario.

Which action should a user take to keep this from happening?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

Step by Step Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:

Understanding the Problem:

The scenario is triggered by a project status update.

After the scenario runs, it updates the project status again, which re-triggers the scenario, creating a loop.

The goal is to prevent the scenario from re-triggering itself.

Option Analysis:

A . When using instant triggers, finish the scenario with the Break directive to prevent the record from being updated again:

Incorrect. The Break directive is not used to prevent updates; it is used to stop further iterations of a scenario. It does not address the root cause of the loop, which is the re-triggering by updated records.

B . Create a filter after the instant trigger that only passes records that have not been updated by Fusion:

Correct. Adding a filter ensures that only records not recently updated by Fusion are processed. This prevents Fusion from re-triggering itself on the same record.

For example, you could use a condition to check if the Last Updated By field does not equal the Fusion user or if the Last Update Date is older than a certain threshold.

C . Schedule the instant trigger to only run at intervals to prevent Fusion from thinking the record has been updated after each run:

Incorrect. Instant triggers are event-driven, and their purpose is to respond to changes immediately. Scheduling them would negate the benefit of instant triggers and does not solve the root problem.

Why Filtering Records is Best:

Targeted Control: A filter after the trigger ensures only relevant updates (e.g., those not caused by Fusion) are processed.

Prevents Loops: By excluding records updated by Fusion, the scenario avoids re-triggering itself.

Maintains Performance: Filtering prevents unnecessary processing of irrelevant records, improving efficiency.

How to Implement:

After the instant trigger module, add a filter module.

Configure the filter to check the Last Updated By field or a custom flag indicating if the update was performed by Fusion.

Example: Last Updated By Fusion User or Update Flag True.

If a custom flag is used, ensure the flag is set when Fusion updates the record.

Alternative Solutions:

Add a custom field (e.g., 'Updated by Fusion') that Fusion sets when it updates a record. This can also be used in the filter condition.

Reference: This approach aligns with Fusion best practices for preventing infinite loops caused by scenarios re-triggering themselves. Filtering ensures the scenario runs only when necessary, avoiding redundant processing and maintaining performance.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Frank
10 months ago
I’m not sure about that, what if the filter misses some updates?
upvoted 0 times
...
Avery
10 months ago
Filters are definitely the way to go, keeps things clean!
upvoted 0 times
...
Lonny
10 months ago
Wait, can you really schedule instant triggers? Sounds odd.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynelle
10 months ago
I disagree, option A seems more straightforward.
upvoted 0 times
...
Asha
10 months ago
I think option B is the best choice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tatum
11 months ago
I’m leaning towards option A, but I’m a bit uncertain about how the Break directive actually works in this context.
upvoted 0 times
...
Fabiola
11 months ago
I feel like scheduling the trigger might not be the best solution. It seems like it could still lead to confusion about the record's status.
upvoted 0 times
...
Caprice
11 months ago
I think option B sounds familiar. We practiced a similar question where filtering records helped avoid repeated updates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alita
11 months ago
I remember we discussed how instant triggers can cause loops if not handled properly, but I'm not sure if the Break directive is the right choice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Doyle
11 months ago
I'm leaning towards Option A. The Break directive feels like the cleanest way to stop the repeated execution of the scenario after the status update. It's a straightforward solution to the problem.
upvoted 0 times
...
Avery
11 months ago
Scheduling the trigger to run at intervals could work, but I'm not sure that would fully prevent the repeated execution. The scenario is triggered by a status update, so it seems like we need a more targeted solution to stop that loop.
upvoted 0 times
...
Misty
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused. Wouldn't a filter after the trigger be a better way to only pass through records that haven't been updated by Fusion? That seems more direct than using the Break directive.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynna
11 months ago
I think the key here is to prevent the record from being updated again after the scenario runs. Option A with the Break directive sounds like the best way to do that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Reyes
2 years ago
I'm not sure, but option B) Create a filter after the instant trigger that only passes records that have not been updated by Fusion also sounds like a good solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavonna
2 years ago
I agree with Ciara. That seems like the best way to prevent the scenario from executing repeatedly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Britt
2 years ago
I'll have to go with option A. Breaking the scenario seems like the most straightforward way to stop the madness. It's not like I have all day to keep rerunning this thing, you know?
upvoted 0 times
Margurite
2 years ago
Let's go with option A then, to prevent the record from being updated again.
upvoted 0 times
...
Orville
2 years ago
Definitely, we don't want the scenario to keep executing repeatedly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Narcisa
2 years ago
I agree, finishing the scenario with the Break directive seems like the most efficient solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lisandra
2 years ago
Option A sounds like the best choice to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Stephane
2 years ago
I'm leaning towards option C. Scheduling the trigger to run at intervals could be a neat way to avoid the repeat executions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alishia
2 years ago
Hmm, option B sounds like a good idea. Filtering out the already updated records seems like a simple solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ciara
2 years ago
I think the answer is A) When using instant triggers, finish the scenario with the Break directive to prevent the record from being updated again.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashaun
2 years ago
I think option A is the way to go. The Break directive should prevent the scenario from running again and again.
upvoted 0 times
Vashti
2 years ago
I think option C could also work, by scheduling the trigger to run at intervals.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shala
2 years ago
I agree, using the Break directive should stop the scenario from repeating.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel