An organization uses CloudHub to deploy all of its applications.
How can a common-global-handler flow be configured so that it can be reused across all of the organization's deployed applications?
A.
Create a Mule plugin project
Create a common-global-error-handler flow inside the plugin project.
Use this plugin as a dependency in all Mute applications.
Import that configuration file in Mute applications.
B.
Create a common-global-error-handler flow in all Mule Applications Refer to it flow-ref wherever needed.
34 comments · newest first
GL
Glen
11 months ago
I think B could lead to redundancy issues in larger apps.
FL
Fletcher
11 months ago
Definitely go with A, plugins are the way to go!
KE
Kenneth
12 months ago
Surprised that D is even an option, isn't that overcomplicating things?
BR
Brynn
12 months ago
I disagree, B is simpler and easier to manage.
OL
Oliva
1 year ago
Option C seems like the best choice for reusability.
CO
Cordie
1 year ago
If I recall correctly, using a domain project could be more efficient for global error handling, but I’m not 100% confident about that.
LU
Luis
1 year ago
I’m a bit confused about the difference between a plugin and a domain project. I feel like I’ve seen both in practice questions before.
CA
Carman
1 year ago
I think option C sounds familiar because we practiced using plugins for shared components in our last session.
JA
Jamie
1 year ago
I remember studying about Mule plugins, but I'm not entirely sure if they are the best way to handle global error flows.
JE
Jean
1 year ago
I'm feeling confident about this one. I think the best approach is to create a Mule plugin project and put the common global error handler flow inside it. That way, I can reuse the configuration across all of the organization's Mule applications.
MA
Mari
1 year ago
Okay, let's think this through step-by-step. I'm pretty sure the answer is either C or D, since those options mention creating a common global error handler in a separate project and using it as a dependency.
EL
Elizabeth
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the difference between a Mule plugin project and a Mule domain project. I'll need to review those concepts before deciding on the best approach.
MI
Milly
1 year ago
This looks like a straightforward question about configuring a common global error handler in Mule applications. I think I can handle this one.
JA
Janey
1 year ago
Okay, I think I know this one. The email confirmation is a cross-cutting concern, so it should be at the Organization level of the ECS.
TE
Terrilyn
1 year ago
I think the key here is the wording "Once your app has been offered for Free". That implies the app has to start as a free version before it can be changed to paid. So the answer is True.
GE
Gertude
2 years ago
Haha, imagine if the answer was 'Create a Mule Hamster project and use that as a dependency.' Now that would be a real curveball!
JA
Jamal
2 years ago
Option A looks good, but I'm a bit worried about the 'Mule plugin' part. Isn't that for more advanced use cases? Hmm, I'll have to think about this one.
SI
Silva
2 years ago
I see, I'll have to think about whether the benefits outweigh the complexity. Thanks for the explanation!
CA
Carrol
2 years ago
Yes, creating a Mule plugin project can be a bit advanced, but it allows for reusing the common-global-error-handler flow across all applications.
LI
Lilli
2 years ago
Option A looks good, but I'm a bit worried about the 'Mule plugin' part. Isn't that for more advanced use cases?
LO
Lottie
2 years ago
Nah, I don't like option B. Referencing the error handler flow-ref in each app seems like a maintenance nightmare waiting to happen.
JA
Jacob
2 years ago
I think option C is the most organized approach, using a plugin project for reusability.
LE
Levi
2 years ago
I prefer option B, it's simpler to just create the flow in each application.
MI
Mitsue
2 years ago
Option D seems a bit overkill to me. Creating a whole Mule domain project just for a common error handler feels like too much overhead.
TR
Troy
2 years ago
Yeah, Option D does seem like overkill. It's better to keep things simple and efficient.
TR
Trinidad
2 years ago
Option B might work for smaller projects, but for a larger organization, Option A is definitely the way to go.
JO
Joni
2 years ago
I agree, using a Mule plugin project makes it easier to manage and maintain the common error handler.
IS
Isreal
2 years ago
Option A seems like the best approach. It keeps things organized and reusable.
RO
Ronny
2 years ago
Hmm, I think option C is the way to go. Creating a Mule plugin project and using it as a dependency seems like the most efficient and reusable approach.
AI
Ailene
2 years ago
Using a plugin as a dependency in all Mule applications is a smart move for maintaining consistency.
MA
Magdalene
2 years ago
I agree, creating a Mule plugin project will save a lot of time and effort in the long run.
TH
Thaddeus
2 years ago
Option C is definitely the best choice. It allows for easy reuse of the common-global-error-handler flow.
OL
Olene
2 years ago
I agree with Weldon, using a plugin project seems more efficient.
WE
Weldon
2 years ago
I think option A is the best way to go.