What AD0-E902 Questions and Answers feature?

Step by Step Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:

Problem Summary:

A trigger module is causing excessive iteration processing thousands of bundles unnecessarily.

The goal is to optimize the scenario by reducing the number of processed bundles.

Option Analysis:

A. Configure the trigger module to reduce the maximum number of results:

Reducing the maximum number of results processed per cycle limits the number of bundles processed at a time, but it does not solve the root issue of processing unnecessary records.

B. Configure the trigger module to filter out unnecessary records:

Filtering at the trigger level ensures that only the required records are fetched for processing, addressing the root cause of excessive bundle processing. This is the correct answer.

C. Configure scenario settings to reduce cycles per execution:

Limiting execution cycles reduces the overall runtime but does not directly address the number of bundles being processed unnecessarily.

Why Filtering at the Trigger is Best:

Efficiency: By setting up filters directly in the trigger, you ensure that only relevant data is retrieved.

Performance: Reducing the number of unnecessary bundles improves processing speed and reduces resource usage.

Accuracy: Filtering ensures only actionable data enters the workflow, maintaining scenario integrity.

How to Implement:

Open the trigger module settings.

Add appropriate filters to exclude unnecessary records. For example:

Add conditions to filter out old data or irrelevant statuses.

Use fields like updatedDate, status, or any other criteria relevant to the workflow.

Test the trigger module to verify that only relevant bundles are retrieved.

References:These answers are based on Workfront Fusion best practices for optimizing scenarios, as outlined in the Fusion documentation. Proper use of mapping panel functions and trigger filters ensures scenarios are efficient and scalable.

Step by Step Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:

Understanding the Scenario:

The diagram shows two routes, each leading to an aggregator module (Aggregator 1 and Aggregator 2).

The bundle inspector indicates different output counts for the two aggregators: Aggregator 1 displays 1, and Aggregator 2 displays 10.

Option Analysis:

A. Aggregator 1’s route is set to process the 1st bundle only, and Aggregator 2's route is set to process all bundles:

Incorrect. Aggregators process data from their input modules based on their configuration. While filters or limits might be applied earlier in the flow, the scenario does not suggest that the aggregator's configuration explicitly limits bundles in this way.

B. The source module for the aggregators are different:

Correct. The two aggregators receive input from different modules. For example, Aggregator 1 might aggregate bundles from "Projects," which outputs a single bundle, while Aggregator 2 aggregates bundles from "Issues," which outputs 10 bundles. This explains the differing numbers in the bundle inspector.

C. Aggregator 2 displays a 10 in the bundle inspector because it is set to repeat 10 times:

Incorrect. Aggregators do not "repeat" a specific number of times. Instead, they process the input bundles passed to them and output a result based on the aggregation logic.

D. The scenario's router is set to only allow projects through the route to Aggregator 1 and only allows tasks through the route to Aggregator 2:

Incorrect. While the router might direct specific bundles (e.g., "Projects" to Aggregator 1 and "Issues" to Aggregator 2), the difference in bundle counts is determined by the source modules, not by the router's configuration alone.

Why Source Modules Determine Bundle Counts:

Each aggregator processes data from a source module. If the source module outputs different numbers of bundles, the aggregators will show different bundle counts.

In this example, "Projects" might output only 1 bundle (e.g., 1 project), while "Issues" outputs 10 bundles (e.g., 10 issues).

How to Verify:

Inspect the source modules feeding into each aggregator. Check the number of bundles they produce during the scenario run.

Confirm that the aggregators are aggregating based on their respective inputs.

References:This explanation aligns with Workfront Fusion's handling of bundles and aggregation logic. Differences in bundle counts at the aggregator level are typically due to differences in the source module outputs, as shown in the scenario.

Workfront's training on scenario testing emphasizes the importance of a well-structured test plan to ensure scenario reliability and accuracy. The three essential elements include:

B. Description of Expected Behavior:

This provides clarity on what the scenario is supposed to achieve when executed successfully.

It serves as a benchmark for evaluating the outcome of test executions.

C. Specific Event/Trigger per Scenario:

Identifying and testing specific triggers ensures that the scenario starts under the correct conditions.

This is crucial for verifying the proper configuration of the scenario’s start point.

D. Description of Testing Steps:

Outlining step-by-step instructions for the testing process ensures that all aspects of the scenario are tested systematically.

It helps identify potential bottlenecks or areas for improvement in the scenario’s configuration.

Why Not Other Options?

A. Roadmap requirements: This pertains to project planning and is not directly relevant to scenario testing.

E. Executive sponsor expectations: While valuable for overall project alignment, it is not an essential component of a technical test plan.

References:

Workfront Training Materials: Best Practices for Scenario Testing

Experience League Documentation: How to Design and Execute a Test Plan for Workfront Fusion Scenarios