Development-Lifecycle-and-Deployment-Architect Salesforce Certified Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect (WI25) Questions and Answers

 Two options that should be considered when making production changes in a highly regulated and audited environment are: all changes including hotfixes should be reviewed against security principles, and any production change should have explicit stakeholder approval. These options can help ensure that the changes are compliant with the regulations and have the necessary authorization and documentation. No manual steps should be carried out is not a valid option, as some changes may require manual steps, such as data migration or post-deployment verification. After deployment, the development team should test and verify functionality in production is also not a valid option, as testing and verification should be done in a lower environment before deploying to production, and the responsibility of testing and verifying functionality in production should be assigned to a different team than the development team. See Application Lifecycle and Deployment for more details.

The correct way to deploy the artifact to the full sandbox is to authorize to the full sandbox org, validate with sfdx:mdapi:deploy, and on successful validation, deploy with sfdx:mdapi:deploy. This is because the artifact is a .zip file, which is in the metadata API format, and not the source format. Therefore, the sfdx:mdapi:deploy command should be used instead of the sfdx:source:deploy command. See Deploy Metadata Using Metadata API for more details.

D is the correct answer, as automated testing is the best approach to mitigate the risk of bugs being inadvertently introduced to production. Automated testing can help to ensure that the code meets the quality and functionality standards, as well as detect and prevent any errors or regressions before deploying to production. A is incorrect, as user acceptance testing is not enough to mitigate the risk of bugs, as it depends on the manual testing and feedback of the end users, which can be subjective and incomplete. B is incorrect, as the use of an agile methodology is not directly related to mitigating the risk of bugs, as it is a way of managing the project scope, requirements, and delivery. C is incorrect, as requirements traceability is not directly related to mitigating the risk of bugs, as it is a way of tracking the requirements and their fulfillment. You can learn more about this topic in the Testing Strategies module on Trailhead.

Creating an unmanaged package of the app and deploying it in NTO’s org is the best option for having ETO’s Sales Optimization app in NTO’s Salesforce org in the shortest possible time. An unmanaged package is a collection of components that can be easily installed and customized in another org. Unlike a managed package, an unmanaged package does not have any restrictions or dependencies on the source org, and does not require a security review or approval from Salesforce. Creating a managed package, creating users in ETO’s org, or building the app from scratch in NTO’s org are not as fast or efficient as creating an unmanaged package.

The Service Cloud developer will see the conflict and need to resolve it when they create a pull request from ServiceCase to UCDev in GitHub. A pull request is a way of proposing changes to a branch and requesting a review and merge from another branch. GitHub will show any conflicts that prevent the pull request from being merged automatically, and the developer will need to resolve them manually before the merge can happen.

The best option for the new BU is to use a new stand-alone Salesforce org, not integrated with the others. This will allow the new BU to have flexibility in their business processes, without affecting or being affected by the other BUs. Since the new BU does not share customers with the other BUs, there is no need to integrate with the customer 360-degree view org, which would add complexity and cost. Deploying the new BU in the customer 360-degree view org is not a good idea, as it would create confusion and duplication of data, as well as limit the customization options for the new BU. Using the same Salesforce org of another BU that shares geographical localization with the new BU is also not a good idea, as it would create conflicts and dependencies between the two BUs, as well as reduce the performance and security of the org. Using a new Salesforce org for the new BU, and customizing integration so that it reads and writes customer information from the customer data org is unnecessary and inefficient, as the new BU does not need to access or update the customer data of the other BUs.

The optimized order to load the objects is: accounts, contacts, leads, products, opportunities, opportunity line items. This order follows the dependency and relationship rules among the objects, such as: accounts must be loaded before contacts, as contacts are related to accounts; leads must be loaded before opportunities, as opportunities can be converted from leads; products must be loaded before opportunity line items, as opportunity line items are related to products; and opportunities must be loaded before opportunity line items, as opportunity line items are related to opportunities. See [Data Import Order] for more details.

The best option for UC is to refresh Stage now, and do not refresh UAT. This way, Stage will be on the preview instance and UAT will not. This will allow UC to test their application on both the current and the next Salesforce version, and ensure that they can release on the current version without any issues. Option B is incorrect because it is not necessary to check the Sandbox Preview Guide or refresh and redeploy to UAT. Option C is incorrect because it is too late to work with support to get on the preview instance after the cutoff dates. Option D is incorrect because it will result in both Stage and UAT being on the same version, which will not allow UC to test their application on the next Salesforce version.

 A single org strategy has the benefits of increased ability to collaborate, centralized data location, and consistent processes across the business. These factors can improve efficiency, data quality, and user adoption. A single org strategy may not allow for tailored implementation or fewer inter-dependencies, as different business units may have different requirements and dependencies.

The best option is to refactor the approach to the feature in an upgraded sandbox, as this will allow the developer to test the compatibility and functionality of the code with the new platform release. Option A is risky, as Salesforce may not fix the issue before the production upgrade. Option B is not feasible, as changing the API version of the code will not change the platform version of the sandbox. Option C is not recommended, as delaying the upgrade will only postpone the problem and may cause more issues later.

 Using a Developer Edition org to stage changes to their Customer Community poses the following risks:

Developer Edition orgs have limited user counts and low data volume limits, which will make User Testing difficult, as the testing environment will not be representative of the production environment.

Developer Edition orgs cannot have sandboxes, which will make team development difficult, as the developers will not be able to work in isolated environments and test their changes before merging them.

Changes Sets cannot be used to deploy from Developer Edition to Production, which will make deployment more complex, as the developers will have to use other tools such as Ant Migration Tool or SFDX CLI to deploy their changes.

 The key features of an agile development support tool that an architect should look for are sprint backlog management, product backlog prioritization, and work assignment. These features enable the team to plan, execute, and monitor the sprints effectively and efficiently. Email notifications and Kanban board are not essential features of an agile development support tool, as they can be achieved by other means or tools.

User centered design is a process that involves understanding the user needs, preferences, and behaviors before building the solution. This way, the solution can be tailored to the user’s goals and expectations, and increase the likelihood of adoption and satisfaction. Using Lightning Web Components, stopping development, or sending communication emails are not effective ways to overcome the problem of unused features.

When migrating a flow with change sets, the following statements should be considered: When a change set with a multiple versioned flow is uploaded, it includes only the active version of the flow. When a change set with a multiple versioned flow is uploaded, and no active version is available, it includes the most recent inactive version of the flow. These statements are based on the Salesforce documentation on how change sets handle flows with multiple versions. The other statements are incorrect, as they do not reflect the actual behavior of change sets.

Announcing the maintenance window ahead of time, defining a rollback strategy, and temporarily suspending configuration changes in production are all best practices for production deployment. These practices help to minimize the risk of errors, downtime, and conflicts during the deployment process.

A and B are the correct answers, as installing an Aloha certified app and upgrading to an Enterprise Edition org are the best solutions to enable advanced quoting in the current Professional Edition org. An Aloha certified app is an app that does not count against the org limits, such as objects and tabs, and can provide additional functionality and features. Upgrading to an Enterprise Edition org can increase the org limits, as well as provide access to more customization and automation options. C is incorrect, as creating and installing an unmanaged package is not a good solution, as it will consume the org limits and may not provide the desired functionality. D is incorrect, as buying more user licenses will not increase the org limits, but only the number of users who can access the org. You can learn more about this topic in the Salesforce Editions and Limits module on Trailhead.

The architect should recommend creating two second generation managed packages with the same namespace and setting the methods that should be shared with the @namespaceAccessible annotation. This will allow the Sales team to access the specific functions of the Service product without exposing them to other teams or customers. Creating two managed packages with different namespaces will not allow the Sales team to access the Service functions, unless they are declared as global, which will expose them to everyone. Creating a managed package with both products will not allow the separation of the products and the control of the functions. Creating an authentication function in the Service package will add unnecessary complexity and overhead to the solution.

The two sandbox types that would be appropriate to use as the hotfix environment are Developer sandbox and Developer Pro sandbox. These sandbox types are suitable for testing and deploying quick fixes, as they are easy to create and refresh, and have a minimal data and metadata footprint. A Partial Copy sandbox or a Full sandbox would be too large and complex for a hotfix environment, and would take longer to create and refresh.

A full sandbox would be appropriate for diagnosing reports of poor performance when accessing certain Visualforce pages, as it provides a complete copy of the production data and metadata, which allows the developers to replicate and troubleshoot the issue in a realistic environment. A partial copy sandbox would not be appropriate, as it only provides a sample of the production data, which may not reflect the actual volume and complexity of the data that affects the performance. A developer sandbox would not be appropriate, as it only provides a copy of the production metadata, but not the data, which makes it impossible to test the performance of the Visualforce pages with real data. A developer pro sandbox would not be appropriate, as it also only provides a copy of the production metadata, but not the data, which makes it impossible to test the performance of the Visualforce pages with real data.

Using static code analysis to enforce coding standards is the best way to improve consistency among the development teams working on different projects. Static code analysis is a tool that can automatically scan the code and detect any violations of the predefined coding rules and best practices. It can also provide feedback and suggestions to the developers on how to improve their code quality and readability. Creating a Center of Excellence for release management, requiring pull requests to be reviewed by two developers before merging, or executing regression testing before code can be committed are also good practices, but they are not as effective or efficient as static code analysis for ensuring coding consistency.

Escalating and communicating to stakeholders the risk and mitigating it by allocating additional resources or extending the timeline of the project to support the new requirement based on stakeholders’ input are two actions that should be performed to mitigate the risk. These actions help to manage the scope change and ensure that the project is delivered with the expected quality and functionality.

Kanban can help clarify whether value is being delivered to the business by using metrics, like lead time and throughput, which increase transparency. Lead time measures how long it takes to complete a work item from the time it is requested, and throughput measures how many work items are completed in a given time period. These metrics can help the business stakeholders see the progress and performance of the development teams, and align their expectations with the reality. Kanban does not respond to unplanned work and changes by dropping everything and jumping on the new request, as this would disrupt the flow and quality of work. Kanban does not make use of the Salesforce Agile Accelerator, as this is a tool for managing agile projects. Kanban does limit work in progress, but this is not the main reason why it can help clarify whether value is being delivered to the business.

 In the Metadata API, the External Object metadata type represents external objects. In the Metadata API, the Custom Object metadata type represents external objects.

 The best way to leverage the Metadata API to communicate the metadata components to the release management team is to use unlocked packages. Unlocked packages are a collection of metadata components that can be easily deployed and updated using the Metadata API. They also provide versioning and dependency tracking features that can help ensure the integrity and compatibility of the components. Providing a spreadsheet, a change set, or an audit trail are not effective ways to use the Metadata API, as they do not capture the full metadata information and require manual intervention.

The best option is to send a package.xml file with associated metadata in a .zip file to the Release Management team, as this will allow them to use the Metadata API to deploy the components to the production org. Option A is not feasible, as change sets cannot be downloaded from sandboxes. Option B is not sufficient, as the readMetadata call only retrieves the metadata information, not the actual components. Option C is not reliable, as the audit trail may not capture all the changes made in the sandbox.

 The sfdx force:source:retrieve command is used to retrieve the metadata from an org to a local project directory. However, before running this command, the developer needs to create a project using the sfdx force:project:create command, and then navigate to the project directory using the cd command. If the developer hasn’t done these steps, they will get the error message: “This command is required to run from within an SFDX project”. The -n option is not required for the sfdx force:project:create command, as it will prompt the developer to enter a project name interactively. The developer can create the project within VSCode and run the command in a separate terminal, as long as they are in the same project directory.

A Port management tool is a tool that can support a project involving a large distributed development and testing team, by providing features such as requirements management, defect tracking, collaboration, and reporting. A Port management tool can also integrate with other tools, such as code repositories, testing tools, and deployment tools, to provide a comprehensive view of the project status and progress. A Spreadsheet is not a suitable tool for managing requirements and defects, as it is prone to errors, duplication, and inconsistency. A Code Repository is a tool that stores and manages the source code of the system, but does not manage requirements and defects. Wave is a tool that provides analytics and insights on data, but does not manage requirements and defects.

 A and C are the characteristics of an effective communication plan, as they enable feedback, collaboration, and transparency among the stakeholders. B is not a characteristic of an effective communication plan, as it does not account for changes in the stakeholder list or their communication preferences. D is not a characteristic of an effective communication plan, as it limits the information sharing and trust among the stakeholders.

 The Metadata API is mainly used for file-based deployment, such as deploying an application from a Developer Edition org to the AppExchange, or from a sandbox org to a production org. The Ant Migration Tool is a wrapper around the Metadata API, so it is not a direct use case for writing code to call retrieve() and deploy() methods. The Salesforce CLI (SFDX) uses the Source-Driven Development model, which relies on the source code as the source of truth, rather than the Metadata API.

The best deployment tool for UC to use to manage their deployment process in an automated fashion is the Force.com Migration Tool, as it is a command-line tool that uses the Metadata API to deploy components from one org to another, and can be integrated with version control systems and continuous integration servers. Option A is not a good choice, as Workbench is a web-based tool that does not support automation or scripting. Option C is not a good choice, as Change Sets are a point-and-click tool that require manual steps to create and deploy. Option D is not a good choice, as Force.com IDE is a desktop tool that does not support automation or scripting.

 B and D are the decisions that should be made by an Architecture Review Board (ARB), as they involve choosing the best methodology and authentication mechanism for the project, which have significant impacts on the project scope, quality, and security. A is not a decision that should be made by an ARB, as it is a low-level design decision that can be made by the developers or technical leads. C is not a decision that should be made by an ARB, as it is a testing decision that can be made by the testers or quality assurance leads.

QUESTIONNO: 87

What is the process used to initiate a connection for change sets?

A. Modify the source org to allow an outbound connection to the target org

B. Modify the target org to accept an outbound connection from the source org

C. Modify the target org to accept an inbound connection from the source org

D. Modify the source org to allow an inbound connection to the target org

Answer: A

A is the correct answer, as the process to initiate a connection for change sets is to modify the source org to allow an outbound connection to the target org. B and C are incorrect, as the target org does not need to accept any connection from the source org, but only to deploy the inbound change sets that are sent from the source org. D is incorrect, as the source org does not need to allow any inbound connection to the target org, but only to create and upload the outbound change sets to the target org. You can learn more about this process in the Change Sets Basics module on Trailhead.

A single-org strategy is the best option for UC, as it will enable them to achieve business process standardization among all business units, which is the main goal of the CEO. A multi-org strategy would make it harder to enforce consistent processes and policies across the different business units, and would also increase the costs and complexity of managing multiple orgs. A common managed package could help with some aspects of standardization, but it would not cover all the possible scenarios and customizations that UC might need.

These are the correct answers because the project steering committee plays a role in approving deviations from the chosen methodology, when required to address project issues, and setting the criteria for selecting agile or waterfall methodology to be used on internal projects. The steering committee does not design a methodology, but rather chooses one from the existing ones. The steering committee does not enforce that corporate project stage gates are part of the chosen methodology but rather ensures that the chosen methodology aligns with the corporate project stage gates.

The best approaches for UC to consider are B and C, as they both involve agile methodologies that can accommodate changing requirements and deliver value to the end users in an iterative and collaborative way. Option B is a good approach, as it allows UC to scope and estimate the project, identify the minimum viable product, and co-create the design with the project stakeholders using a product backlog and sprints2. Option C is also a good approach, as it allows UC to gather the remaining requirements and complete the architecture and design, then initiate the build/test processes with frequent reviews by the stakeholders, and perform acceptance testing and validate compliance with regulatory requirements3. Option A is not a good approach, as it involves a waterfall project that is rigid and sequential, and may result in re-work and delays if the requirements change or conflict4. Option D is not a realistic approach, as it assumes that budget and timeline will not be a factor with an agile methodology, which is not true, as agile projects still need to have clear scope, budget, and timeline constraints

 This is the correct answer because the executive sponsor is the senior leader who provides strategic direction, funding, and support for the project. The executive sponsor is also responsible for approving any changes to the project scope, budget, or timeline that may affect the project outcomes or benefits.

 A and C are the advantages of using an Agile Project Management tool, as they provide visibility into the project progress and status, and consolidate the project artifacts in a common repository. B is not an advantage of using an Agile Project Management tool, as it depends on the communication and collaboration skills of the team members and stakeholders. D is not an advantage of using an Agile Project Management tool, as it is more related to the governance framework and methodology of the project

 The following issues could be affecting their deployment times:

The number and complexity of Apex tests will have a large impact on the deployment time, as the tests will take longer to run and consume more resources.

Some components such as profiles, custom junction objects, and fields take longer to process than others, as they have more dependencies and validations to check.

Users are working in the org during deployment can affect users and the deployment, as they can lock records or metadata components that are being deployed, causing errors or delays.

: Storing the records in sandboxes and production is not a good practice, as it can lead to data inconsistencies and conflicts. Storing the records in a version control system is a better option, as it allows tracking changes and deploying them to different environments. Using a third-party product to manage these records is also a valid option, as it can provide features such as data backup, restore, and migration.

Manually validating change sets before deployment is a recommended practice to avoid possible delays while deploying a change set, as it can help you identify and resolve any errors or dependencies before the actual deployment. Change set performance is not independent of included components, as some components may take longer to deploy than others. Manually creating new custom objects and new custom fields or manually applying the field type changes are not advisable, as they can introduce human errors and inconsistencies between environments. See Deploy Changes with Change Sets for more details.

C and D are the best approaches to develop customizations once and make them available in both orgs, as they use packages that can be installed and updated in multiple orgs. A is not a good approach, as it does not allow for versioning and dependency management of the customizations. B is not a good approach, as it does not support deploying metadata components between orgs.

Program team and executive sponsors are two user groups that an architect should recommend to join the COE. A program team is a group of people who are responsible for managing and delivering the Salesforce projects and initiatives. They can provide the COE with the technical expertise, best practices, and project management skills. An executive sponsor is a senior leader who supports and advocates for the Salesforce program. They can provide the COE with the strategic direction, business alignment, and funding support.

Testing load considering 50% more call volume is a reasonable test load consideration, as it can simulate the expected future growth and ensure that the application can handle the increased demand without compromising the performance or functionality.

A requirement traceability matrix is a project artifact that maps each requirement to its corresponding test cases, ensuring that all requirements are covered by testing. User acceptance test scripts are the actual steps to execute the test cases, not the artifact that links them to the requirements. Testing strategy and test execution plan are high-level documents that describe the overall approach and schedule for testing, not the specific mapping of requirements and test cases.

The best practice for releasing near peak business periods is to avoid doing so, as it can cause disruption and risk to the business operations. Making declarative changes in production, bypassing regression testing, and having developers conduct user acceptance testing are all bad practices that can introduce errors and instability to the system.

 Creating a Center of Excellence with a charter document is a recommended practice for managing multiple projects and aligning them with the business goals and roadmap. A Center of Excellence is a cross-functional team that provides guidance, support, and governance for the Salesforce ecosystem. A charter document defines the vision, mission, roles, and responsibilities of the Center of Excellence.

 The success criteria for data migration and the manual and automated data validation approaches are two key areas of UC’s data migration test plan that should be included. The success criteria define the expected outcomes and quality standards for the data migration process. The data validation approaches ensure that the data is accurate, complete, and consistent after the migration.

 D is the correct answer, as the risk with this plan is that multiple work-streams with dependencies could impact the go-live. If the legacy system upgrade and the new integration are not aligned and coordinated, there could be delays, errors, or failures in the project delivery. A is incorrect, as the deadline being scheduled during a Salesforce release is not a risk, but an opportunity to leverage the new features and enhancements that Salesforce provides. B is incorrect, as the project team using the Waterfall methodology is not a risk, but a choice that depends on the project scope, complexity, and requirements. C is incorrect, as the legacy system team using an Agile methodology is not a risk, but a choice that depends on the project scope, complexity, and requirements. You can learn more about the risk management in the Project Management Strategies for Salesforce Implementations module on Trailhead.

The best options to enforce code quality in UC’s continuous integration process are to introduce manual code review before deployment to the testing sandbox and to introduce static code analysis before deployment to the testing sandbox. Manual code review can help identify and fix any errors, bugs, or best practices violations in the code. Static code analysis can help check the code quality, complexity, and security using automated tools and standards. Introducing manual code review before deployment to the production org may be too late, as the code may have already caused defects or issues in the testing sandbox. Increasing the size of the testing team assigned to the project may not improve the code quality, as the testing team may not have the skills or authority to review or modify the code. Testing data creation is outside the scope of code quality.

A change to a multi-org strategy can be justified by two reasons: launching a new line of business with independent processes and acquiring a company that has its own Salesforce org and operates in a different business with its own set of regulatory requirements. These reasons indicate that the single-org strategy is no longer feasible or optimal, as it would require too much customization, complexity, and compliance. Using Chatter for collaboration among different business units is not a reason to change to a multi-org strategy, as Chatter can work across multiple orgs. Following a unification enterprise architecture operating model is also not a reason to change to a multi-org strategy, as this model implies having orgs with the same processes implemented for each business unit, which is more suitable for a single-org strategy.

 DevPro1 cannot be cloned because it is on a different version from Production, as it was upgraded to preview for the next Salesforce major release two weeks ago. Therefore, the architect should recommend creating a new DevPro2, and migrating metadata from DevPro1. This way, the second work stream can work on the Service Cloud requirements in a separate sandbox, without affecting the Sales Cloud dev team. Asking the second work stream team to work on the same DevPro1 sandbox would create conflicts and dependencies between the two teams, and would not allow them to release at different times. Pushing back on the requirements because adding another work stream will bring some risks with it would not be a good option, as the business needs might be urgent and important.

C is the correct answer, as creating a custom metadata type and including this in your deployment to production is the best way to manage this deployment. A custom metadata type is a metadata component that can store important configuration data, such as custom settings, and can be deployed along with other components, such as Apex classes. A is incorrect, as scripting the deployment of all functionality via the Force.com Migration Tool is not a good way to manage this deployment, as it does not address the issue of deploying the custom settings that hold the configuration data. B is incorrect, as manually deploying and populating custom settings in production using a change set is not a good way to manage this deployment, as it can introduce errors and inconsistencies, as well as require additional steps and permissions. D is incorrect, as manually deploying and populating the custom settings in production prior to the Apex class deployment is not a good way to manage this deployment, as it can create dependency and timing issues, as well as require additional steps and permissions. You can learn more about this topic in the [Custom Metadata Types] module on Trailhead.

The best way to migrate from a managed package to an unlocked package is to split the components into two packages: one for the objects and fields, and one for the classes, Visualforce, and other components. This way, the data and integrations with the objects and fields of the managed package are preserved, and the classes and Visualforce can be modified and deployed using CI/CD processes with the unlocked package. Exporting and restoring the data from the managed package is not a feasible solution, as it would require a lot of effort and risk data loss or corruption. Installing the unlocked package with the same namespace as the managed package is not possible, as namespaces are unique and cannot be reused. Staying with the managed package is not a good option, as it does not allow for better integration with CI/CD processes.

 Extracting each permission set, committing and merging to source control, and running through CI checks is the best strategy to bring the issue of failing SOQL statements to the developer’s attention earlier. This way, the developers can review the changes made by the administrators, and ensure that they do not break any existing functionality or security rules. Asking administrators to only make changes to profiles instead would not solve the problem, as profiles can also affect SOQL queries. Creating a sandbox refresh strategy to ensure each sandbox is refreshed every day would not prevent the issue from happening, as the changes made by the administrators would still be propagated to the sandboxes. Advising developers to switch to SOSL queries that are more robust instead would not address the root cause of the issue, which is the lack of visibility and control over the permission sets.

The only condition that would make continuous integration unsuitable for UC is if their Salesforce instance has only standard functionality, as this would mean that there is no need for code deployment or version control. Option A is not a valid reason, as test scripts can be generated and executed as part of the continuous integration process. Option B is not a valid reason, as a full sandbox is not a requirement for continuous integration, and other types of sandboxes can be used instead. Option D is not a valid reason, as there are free or low-cost software tools available for continuous integration, such as Jenkins, Git, and Ant

Tracking effort estimates, actuals, and remaining work can help the developer improve their estimation skills and accuracy, which can benefit the project planning and delivery.

The benefits of managing change with Packaged Development are:

Versioning to help with change management, as it allows the developers to track the changes made to the metadata and roll back to previous versions if needed.

Making the release cycle more efficient and agile, as it enables the developers to deploy smaller and more frequent updates to the orgs, reducing the risk of errors and conflicts.

Modular development process with specification of dependencies among packages, as it allows the developers to break down the metadata into logical units that can be reused and updated independently, while ensuring that the dependencies are resolved correctly. Managing the number of sandboxes needed to successfully deploy is not a benefit of Packaged Development, as it is more related to the sandbox strategy and the development model. Clearly dividing developers and testers is also not a benefit of Packaged Development, as it is more related to the team structure and the testing strategy.

This is the correct answer because Salesforce prohibits stress testing against production because it is a shared environment that hosts multiple customers and tenants. Stress testing against production may affect the performance and availability of the Salesforce service for other customers and violate the terms of service. Stress testing should be done in a sandbox or a developer edition org that is isolated from production.

 To address the bug in production, the architect should recommend the following approaches: Investigate potential data impacts, fix the bug in a hotfix branch, and seek stakeholder approval for the hotfix. Investigating the data impacts can help assess the severity and scope of the bug, and determine the best course of action to mitigate any data loss or corruption. Fixing the bug in a hotfix branch can help isolate the change and avoid introducing any other changes from the current sprint. Seeking stakeholder approval for the hotfix can help ensure compliance with the regulatory requirements and governance policies.

The best deployment strategy for UC to use in this environment is to refresh the developer’s sandbox, develop changes, refresh the common sandbox, deploy to the common sandbox, test changes, as this will ensure that the developer’s sandbox has the latest production data and metadata, and that the common sandbox has the latest production data and metadata as well as the developer’s changes, before testing and deploying to production. Option B is not correct, as refreshing the developer’s sandbox after testing the changes will erase the changes and make them unavailable for deployment to the common sandbox. Option C is not correct, as refreshing the developer’s sandbox after developing the changes will erase the changes and make them unavailable for deployment to the common sandbox. Option D is not correct, as refreshing the common sandbox before developing the changes will make the common sandbox out of sync with the production data and metadata.

The problem is that UAT is on a preview release and SIT is not. A preview release is a version of Salesforce that contains the features and enhancements that will be available in the next major release. Preview releases are usually available a few weeks before the official release date, and they are assigned to a subset of instances. If UAT and SIT are on different instances, they may have different release versions, which can cause deployment issues. For example, if UAT has a preview release that contains some new metadata types that are not available in SIT, then deploying those metadata types from SIT to UAT will fail. To avoid this problem, the architect should check the Sandbox Preview Guide1 and the Release Notes2 to see if there are any changes that affect the deployment, and refresh and redeploy the sandboxes accordingly. There is a problem, and it is not expected behavior. Using the DX command line instead will not solve the problem, as it will still encounter the same version mismatch. SIT is not on a preview release and UAT is not, as that would not cause any deployment issues.

 The best option for UC given the scenario is to opt for a multi-org strategy, where each org can have its own sales process, common rules, and operate in locale. A multi-org strategy can accommodate the different languages, sales processes, and legal requirements of the two business units. A multi-org strategy can also allow for more innovation and flexibility, as each org can customize and optimize its own functionality. A single-org strategy may not be able to support the different languages, sales processes, and legal requirements of the two business units. A single-org strategy may also limit the innovation and flexibility, as the org has to follow a standardized and consistent approach.

The product team should review the Checkmarx errors and determine if they need to fix them or not. If the errors are false positives, meaning that they do not indicate a real security issue, the product team should mark them as such and attach an explanation, then submit the security review. This will help the Salesforce security review team to understand the rationale behind the code and avoid unnecessary rejections. The product team should not leave the errors to the Salesforce security review team, as they may reject the request if they find any potential security issue. The product team should not leave a partner support case, as this is not the proper channel for resolving code issues. The product team should not fix all the errors before submitting the security review, as some of them may not be relevant or critical, and fixing them may introduce new bugs or delays.

The architect should recommend using Git to create a release branch from the develop branch. All fixes must be made in the release branch. After deployment, merge release with develop. This strategy allows the team to isolate the changes that are ready for deployment from the changes that are still in progress. It also ensures that the fixes are applied to both the release and the develop branches. The other options do not follow the best practices of Git branching and merging.

The three benefits of using a partner development org over an individual development org in this scenario are:

Partner development org has a greater number of licenses available for the team. This means that the developers can test their app with different user profiles and permissions, and also invite beta testers to provide feedback2.

Partner development org offers higher API limit. This means that the developers can use more API calls to integrate their app with external systems or services, and also leverage the Salesforce APIs to automate their development and deployment processes2.

Partner development org offers more storage. This means that the developers can store more data and files in their org, and also use more features and components that require storage, such as Big Objects, Platform Events, or Lightning Web Components2.

The other options are not benefits of using a partner development org over an individual development org in this scenario, because:

Only partner development org supports managed beta testing. This is not true, as both partner development org and individual development org can create and distribute managed beta packages3.

Partner development org never expires. This is also not true, as partner development orgs have a 12-month expiration period, which can be extended by request