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

Salesforce Plat-Arch-204 Exam - Topic 6 Question 12 Discussion

Posted by Bronwyn on May 29, 2026 at 03:25 PM

An enterprise architect has requested the Salesforce integration architect to review the following (see diagram and description) and provide recommendations after carefully considering all constraints of the enterprise systems and Salesforce Platform limits.

About 3,000 phone sales agents use a Salesforce Lightning user interface (UI) concurrently to check eligibility of a customer for a qualifying offer.

There are multiple eligibility systems that provide this service and are hosted externally.

However, their current response times could take up to 90 seconds to process and return (there are discussions to reduce the response times in the future, but no commitments are made).

These eligibility systems can be accessed through APIs orchestrated via ESB (MuleSoft).

All requests from Salesforce will have to traverse through the customer's API Gateway layer, and the API Gateway imposes a constraint of timing out requests after 9 seconds.

Which recommendation should the integration architect make?

Suggested Answer: C

The primary architectural challenge in this scenario is the massive discrepancy between the backend response time (up to 90 seconds) and the API Gateway timeout constraint (9 seconds). In any synchronous integration pattern, the connection must remain open across the entire path; if the API Gateway closes the connection at 9 seconds, a standard Salesforce 'Request-Reply' callout will fail long before the 90-second eligibility check is complete.

Option A is non-viable because synchronous polling at a high scale (3,000 concurrent users) would likely hit Salesforce concurrent request limits and place an immense, unnecessary load on the API Gateway. Option B, using Continuation, is designed to handle long-running callouts (up to 120 seconds) without blocking Salesforce threads, but it still requires the external connection path to remain open. It does not bypass the 9-second timeout imposed by the customer's API Gateway.

The optimal recommendation is Option C, which implements an Asynchronous Request-Reply pattern using Platform Events and the empAPI.12

Request Phase: The Salesforce UI initiates the request. To bypass the 9-second gateway timeout, the ESB (MuleSoft) should be configured to receive the request3 and immediately return an acknowledgment (e.g.,4 HTTP 202 Accepted). This allows the initial Salesforce callout to complete successfully within the 9-second window.56

Processing Phase: MuleSoft then proceeds with the long-running (up to 90 seconds) call to the external eligibility systems.78

Callback Phase (Remote Call-In)9: Once the eligibility result is received, MuleSoft calls back into Salesforce via the REST API to publish a Platform Event containing the result.10

UI Update (empA11PI): The 3,000 sales agents' browsers, having subscribed to the event channel using the empAPI (Lightning's built-in library for streaming events), receive the notification in real-time. The UI then updates to display the 'Display Response' step.

This event-driven architecture effectively 'insulates' Salesforce and the API Gateway from the backend's high latency, ensures scalability for 3,000 concurrent users, and provides a seamless, real-time user experience without hitting governor limits or timeout constraints.

==========


Get Premium Plat-Arch-204 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
23 comments · newest first
HA
Harrison 2 days ago
I’m leaning towards B too.
JA
Jacki 7 days ago
Yeah, it could lead to timeouts.
BE
Beatriz 13 days ago
Option A seems risky with Apex callouts.
EM
Emerson 18 days ago
True, but it adds complexity.
TU
Tuyet 23 days ago
It supports high concurrency with platform events.
AL
Alline 28 days ago
Why C?
TU
Tuyet 1 month ago
I prefer option C.
HA
Harrison 1 month ago
Exactly! Polling might help.
BE
Beatriz 1 month ago
But what about the 9-second timeout?
JA
Jacki 2 months ago
Continuation callouts can handle long responses.
AL
Alline 2 months ago
Why B?
JA
Jacki 2 months ago
I think option B is best.
EM
Emerson 2 months ago
I feel the same. Too many constraints!
HA
Harrison 2 months ago
This question is tricky.
VE
Veronika 2 months ago
Continuation callouts seem like a solid choice for better performance.
GA
Gail 3 months ago
Wait, 90 seconds response time? That’s insane! Can they really fix that?
DI
Diego 3 months ago
Not sure if polling is a good idea, could lead to more delays.
RO
Rosio 3 months ago
I think option C is the best way to handle those concurrent users!
CH
Cherry 3 months ago
Sounds like a classic case of timeout issues with the API Gateway.
NG
Nguyet 3 months ago
I recall a practice question that involved API timeouts, and I think polling might not be the best approach since it could lead to more delays.
MA
Marjory 4 months ago
I feel like the platform event option could be effective, especially with the empAPI, but I’m worried about the complexity of implementing that solution with the current systems.
AH
Ahmed 4 months ago
I think using Continuation callouts could be a good option since it allows for asynchronous processing, but I’m a bit unclear on how it would handle the high concurrency of 3,000 users.
CH
Christene 4 months ago
I remember we discussed the importance of response times in our last study session, but I'm not sure if synchronous Apex callouts are the best choice given the 9-second timeout.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel