Examine this SQL statement:

Question

Options

• Adb.country. fields ( [ 'Name ' , 'Population* ] ) .where ( 'Name LIKE "United%',,) -select ()-limit(5)
• Bdb . country, select ( [ ' Name LIKE "united%" ' , ' Population>^0 ' ] ) - limit (5)
• Cdb . country. fields ( [ ' Name ' , 'Population']) . select (' limit=5 ' ) .where('Name LIKE "United%" ' )
• Ddb. country-select(['Name','Population']) .where('Name LIKE :param') -bind ('param' , 'United*') -
• Edb . country. Select ([Name' , 'Population.'] ) -limit (5) .where('Name LIKE "United%"')

• A
  9% (3)
• B
  22% (7)
• C
  3% (1)
• D
  59% (19)
• E
  6% (2)

Explanation

Option D is correct because it uses a parameterized query (:param placeholder with .bind()), which is the proper and secure pattern for injecting user-supplied values into query conditions - it prevents SQL injection and follows established query builder best practices for safe, dynamic filtering.

Why the distractors fail:

• A - Uses .fields() (not a standard method in this API) and has a malformed column name (Population*), making it syntactically invalid.
• B - Embeds the LIKE condition and a nonsensical Population>^0 expression directly inside .select(), conflating column selection with filtering logic.
• C - Passes 'limit=5' as a string argument to .select(), which is invalid; limit is a separate chained call, not a string option inside select.
• E - Has a trailing period on 'Population.' (invalid field name) and, depending on the framework, .where() chained after .limit() may not be evaluated correctly.

Memory tip: Think "D for Defense" - option D defends against injection by never interpolating values directly into the query string, using :param + .bind() instead. Whenever you see raw string interpolation or malformed method arguments in the other options, that's a red flag they're wrong.

No community discussion yet for this question.