S90-09A · Question #17
Service Consumer A sends a message to Service A (1), which then forwards the message to Service B (2). Service B forwards the message to Service C (3), which finally forwards the message to Service…
The correct answer is A. The Intermediate Routing pattern can be applied together with the Service Agent pattern in order. Option A correctly identifies that applying Intermediate Routing centralizes the forwarding logic into a dedicated routing component, eliminating the need for Services A, B, and C to each explicitly invoke the next service - this directly addresses the first problem of too many…
Question
Service Consumer A sends a message to Service A (1), which then forwards the message to Service B (2). Service B forwards the message to Service C (3), which finally forwards the message to Service D (4). Services A, B, and C each contain logic that reads the content of the message and, based on this content, determines which service to forward the message to. As a result, what is shown in the Figure is one of several possible runtime scenarios. You are told that the current service composition architecture is having performance problems because of two specific reasons. First, too many services need to be explicitly invoked in order for the message to arrive at its destination. Secondly, because each of the intermediary services is required to read the entire message contents in order to determine where to forward the message to, it is taking too long for the overall task to complete. What steps can be taken to solve these problems without sacrificing any of the functionality that currently exists?
Exhibit
Options
- AThe Intermediate Routing pattern can be applied together with the Service Agent pattern in order
- BThe Intermediate Routing pattern can be applied together with the Service Agent pattern in order
- CThe Intermediate Routing pattern can be applied together with the Service Agent pattern in order
- DNone of the above.
How the community answered
(20 responses)- A50% (10)
- B30% (6)
- C15% (3)
- D5% (1)
Explanation
Option A correctly identifies that applying Intermediate Routing centralizes the forwarding logic into a dedicated routing component, eliminating the need for Services A, B, and C to each explicitly invoke the next service - this directly addresses the first problem of too many explicit invocations. Pairing it with the Service Agent pattern allows the router to make forwarding decisions by inspecting only the message header or envelope rather than the full message body, solving the second problem of slow content inspection without losing any routing functionality. Options B and C are distractors that likely describe the same patterns but with incorrect or incomplete descriptions of how they solve the two stated problems (e.g., wrong scope of what the agent reads, or wrong claim about functionality preservation). Option D is wrong because a valid architectural solution does exist. Memory tip: Think of it as "route smarter, not harder" - Intermediate Routing = fewer hops, Service Agent = lighter reads; together they fix both speed problems without changing what the system can do.
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.