What are three benefits of using an extract as compared to a live connection to a data source? (Choose three.)

Question

Exhibit

Options

• AA live connection to a data source provides the best performance for data connections.
• BCalculated fields perform better in workbooks connected to extracts than in workbooks with live
• CExtracts are stored in memory (RAM), resulting in faster query performance as compared with live
• DAn extract reduces the amount of data stored on a client computer as compared to a live data
• EA live connection to a data source can be slow due to network and user traffic, whereas a

Explanation

Based on Tableau exam content, the three correct answers are B, C, and E.

B, C, and E each describe genuine advantages of extracts over live connections. Extracts use Tableau's optimized Hyper data engine, which pre-computes calculated fields (B) and delivers faster query performance than querying a remote database over a network (C). Live connections are also vulnerable to network latency and concurrent user traffic on the source database, slowdowns that extracts avoid entirely since the data is local (E).

A is wrong because it argues in favor of live connections, not extracts - it's describing a benefit of the competing option. Live connections can actually be slower when the source database is under heavy load.

D is wrong because it reverses the logic: an extract increases data stored locally on the client (it downloads and saves a copy of the data), whereas a live connection stores nothing locally.

Memory tip: Think of an extract as a "snapshot saved to your laptop" - it's faster and works offline, but it takes up local space. Any choice claiming extracts reduce local storage is a trap, and any choice praising live connections is describing the wrong option entirely.

No community discussion yet for this question.