Currently, due to the increasing amount of concurrent access by service consumers, the runtime performance of both the Client and Vendor services has worsened and has therefore reduced their…

Question

Options

• AThe Rules Centralization pattern can be applied by extracting the business rule logic from the
• BThe Redundant Implementation pattern can be applied to the Client and Vendor services, thereby
• CThe Rules Centralization pattern can be applied to isolate business rules logic into a central and
• DNone of the above.

• A
  46% (11)
• B
  13% (3)
• C
  33% (8)
• D
  8% (2)

Explanation

Option A correctly identifies the Rules Centralization pattern as the solution because it directly addresses both problems at once: by extracting the shared business rule logic from the Client and Vendor services into a dedicated, reusable rules service, redundant logic is eliminated and each service becomes leaner-reducing processing overhead under concurrent load.

Option B is wrong because the Redundant Implementation pattern creates duplicate service instances to improve availability and load distribution, but it does nothing to eliminate the duplicate business rule logic-it would actually replicate the redundancy further.

Option C is a distractor that also references Rules Centralization but describes it incorrectly or incompletely (likely omitting the extraction from both services or misrepresenting how it resolves the performance issue), making it an imprecise answer that doesn't fully satisfy both requirements.

Option D is wrong simply because A is a valid solution.

Memory tip: Think of Rules Centralization as the SOA equivalent of the DRY principle-"Don't Repeat Yourself." Whenever you see shared logic + performance degradation across multiple services, that's your cue: centralize the rules, shrink the services, solve both problems with one pattern.

No community discussion yet for this question.