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
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

OutSystems Architecture-Specialist-11 Exam - Topic 1 Question 57 Discussion

"Spaghetti Architecture" is also known as 'tightly coupled architecture' or 'brittle architecture'. Which is NOT a reason why is "Spaghetti Architecture" bad?
C) Any changes is maintainable and easy to deploy
A) One small change in a component cause a series of cascading effects on other components
B) Hinder future changes as they become less flexible and difficult to manage

OutSystems Architecture-Specialist-11 Exam - Topic 1 Question 57 Discussion

Actual exam question for OutSystems's Architecture-Specialist-11 exam
Question #: 57
Topic #: 1
[All Architecture-Specialist-11 Questions]

"Spaghetti Architecture" is also known as 'tightly coupled architecture' or 'brittle architecture'. Which is NOT a reason why is "Spaghetti Architecture" bad?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Terina at Jun 20, 2026, 03:16 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium Architecture-Specialist-11 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Ozell
16 days ago
Definitely C. If it's easy to change, it's not spaghetti!
upvoted 0 times
...
Ludivina
21 days ago
Agreed! C makes sense. Spaghetti architecture isn't maintainable.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jettie
26 days ago
I think C is the answer. Changes should be easy to deploy.
upvoted 0 times
...
Geraldine
1 month ago
Are we sure C is maintainable? Sounds too good to be true!
upvoted 0 times
...
Keneth
1 month ago
A and B are super valid reasons, but C just doesn't fit.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jackie
1 month ago
Wow, I didn't know it was also called brittle architecture!
upvoted 0 times
...
Merissa
2 months ago
I disagree, any change can be a headache in spaghetti architecture.
upvoted 0 times
...
Catina
2 months ago
C is definitely the right answer!
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawana
2 months ago
I’m leaning towards C being the answer, but I’m not completely confident. It just seems too optimistic for spaghetti architecture.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margret
2 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think B makes sense too. If it's hard to manage, that sounds like a problem.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ricki
2 months ago
I feel like I’ve seen a similar question before, and I think C is the one that doesn’t fit. Changes should be hard in spaghetti architecture, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Twana
2 months ago
I remember studying about how tightly coupled systems can lead to cascading failures, so I think A is definitely a reason why it's bad.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel