2026年Pass4Testの最新Plat-Arch-204 PDFダンプおよびPlat-Arch-204試験エンジンの無料共有：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1c7Hp7k-lolQemUzAJGTkfW-ksxZ2wKf6
初めて練習を選ぶことは、ギャンブルをすることに少し似ていると思うかもしれません。ただし、Plat-Arch-204学習クイズでは、参考になる無料のデモと、バックアップとしてのプロのエリートが用意されています。正確率は信じられないほど高く、試験の受験者の98％以上が合格しました。 Plat-Arch-204スタディガイドを定期的かつ永続的に実践できる限り、進歩を遂げ、証明書をスムーズに取得するという目標は簡単に実現できます。
| Certification Vendor: | Salesforce |
|---|---|
| Exam Name: | Salesforce Certified Platform Integration Architect Exam |
| Exam Number: | Plat-Arch-204 |
| Exam Format: | Multiple Choice, Multiple Select |
| Real Exam Qty: | Approximately 60 questions |
| Passing Score: | Approximately 58% |
| Related Certifications: | Salesforce Certified Application Architect Salesforce Certified Sharing and Visibility Architect Salesforce Certified System Architect Salesforce Certified Integration Architect Salesforce Certified Data Architect |
| Exam Duration: | 105 minutes |
| Certificate Validity Period: | Maintained with annual certification maintenance requirements (no fixed expiration if maintained) |
| Exam Price: | USD 400 |
| Available Languages: | English |
| Recommended Training: | Integration Architecture Designer Modules Salesforce Trailhead Integration Architect Learning Path |
| Exam Registration: | Salesforce Certification Registration Webassessor (Kryterion exam delivery) |
| Sample Questions: | Salesforce Plat-Arch-204 Sample Questions |
| Exam Way: | Online proctored or onsite testing center (varies by region and provider availability) |
| Pre Condition: | Recommended prerequisite: Salesforce Certified Application Architect and Salesforce Certified System Architect (part of the Salesforce Certified Technical Architect track is strongly recommended). |
| Official Syllabus URL: | https://trailhead.salesforce.com/en/credentials/platformintegrationarchitect |
当社Salesforceでは、多くの分野の専門家を雇用してPlat-Arch-204学習ガイドを作成しているため、学習教材の品質を安心してご利用いただけます。 さらに、Plat-Arch-204試験問題のガイダンスに基づいて試験の準備をすることで、Pass4Test近い将来昇進する機会を増やし、給与を引き上げることができます。 したがって、Salesforce Certified Platform Integration Architect試験を受ける準備ができたら、Plat-Arch-204学習教材を利用できます。 次の受益者になりたい場合、何を待っていますか？ Plat-Arch-204学習教材を購入してください。
| トピック | 出題範囲 |
|---|---|
| トピック 1 |
|
| トピック 2 |
|
| トピック 3 |
|
| トピック 4 |
|
質問 # 39
Northern Trail Outfitters (NTO) has recently changed its Corporate Security Guidelines requiring all cloud applications to pass through a secure firewall before accessing on-premise resources. NTO is evaluating middleware solutions. Which consideration should an integration architect evaluate before choosing a middleware solution?
正解：B
解説：
When corporate guidelines mandate a firewall-protected entry point for cloud traffic, the middleware architecture must include a component capable of residing in a Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) or perimeter network. The architect must evaluate the solution's API Gateway capabilities.
A secure API Gateway acts as the intermediary that terminates external (cloud) TLS connections and inspects incoming traffic before proxying it to internal systems. It allows the security team to implement:
IP Whitelisting: Ensuring only Salesforce's IP ranges can access the gateway.
Mutual Authentication: Using certificates to verify that the request is genuinely coming from the Salesforce org.
Rate Limiting: Protecting on-premise resources from being overwhelmed by cloud requests.
Option A (OAuth) is an authorization framework and does not satisfy the network-level firewall requirement on its own. Option B (ODBC) is an internal database protocol that should generally never be exposed to a cloud-facing firewall due to security risks. By prioritizing a solution with a hardened API Gateway, the architect ensures that NTO meets its new security mandates while providing a scalable and secure bridge for Salesforce to access back-office services.
質問 # 40
A customer is evaluating the Platform Events solution and would like help in comparing/contrasting it with Outbound Messaging for real-time/near-real time needs. They expect 3,000 customers to view messages in Salesforce. What should be evaluated and highlighted when deciding between the solutions?12
正解：B
解説：
When comparing Platform Events and Outbound Messaging for a near-real-time architecture, a Salesforce Platform Integration Architect must evaluate fundamental differences in their delivery models and governance. While both provide declarative, asynchronous "Fire-and-Forget" capabilities, their technical constraints differ significantly, particularly regarding scalability and platform limits.
The key architectural highlight in this scenario is that Platform Events operate on a specialized event bus with specific Event Publishing and Event Delivery limits. Unlike Outbound Messaging, which is governed by more general daily outbound call limits (often tied to user licenses), Platform Events have a dedicated allocation for the number of events that can be published per hour and delivered in a 24-hour period to external clients via the Pub/Sub API or CometD. For example, the number of concurrent subscribers to a Platform Event channel is typically capped at 2,000 for standard configurations. Since the customer expects 3,000 customers to view these messages, this limit is a critical evaluation point; the architecture would need to account for this gap, perhaps by using middleware to fan out messages to the larger audience.
In contrast, Outbound Messaging does not have an "Event Delivery" limit in the same sense. It is a point-to-point SOAP-based push mechanism where Salesforce manages retries for up to 24 hours if the receiving endpoint is unavailable. However, it is less flexible for multi-consumer scenarios because it requires a separate configuration for every unique destination.
Regarding the other options: Option A is incorrect because neither system strictly guarantees "exactly-once" delivery without the possibility of duplicates; in fact, Outbound Messaging may deliver a message more than once if it doesn't receive a timely acknowledgment. Option B is incorrect because Platform Events do not have built-in "fault recovery" handled by Salesforce in the same way as Outbound Messaging's automatic retry queue; with Platform Events, it is the subscriber's responsibility to use a Replay ID to retrieve missed events within the 72-hour retention window. Therefore, highlighting the unique delivery and publishing limits is the most vital step for the architect.
質問 # 41
Given the diagram above, a Salesforce org, middleware, and Historical Data store exist with connectivity between them. Historical records are archived from Salesforce, moved to a Historical Data store (which houses 20 million records and growing), and fine-tuned to be performant with search queries. When reviewing occasional special cases, call center agents that use Salesforce have requested access to view the historical case items that relate to submitted cases.
Which mechanism and patterns are recommended to maximize declarative configuration?
正解：C
解説：
When designing a solution to view large volumes of archived data (over 20 million records) without physically storing them back in Salesforce, a Data Virtualization pattern is the architecturally preferred approach. This pattern allows users to view and interact with external data in real-time without the overhead of data replication, which would otherwise consume significant storage and impact platform performance.
To maximize declarative configuration, the Salesforce Platform Integration Architect should recommend Salesforce Connect. Salesforce Connect allows for the creation of External Objects, which behave much like standard objects but point to data residing outside of Salesforce. This is achieved by having the middleware (ESB) expose the Historical Data store via an OData (Open Data Protocol) endpoint. Once configured, call center agents can view historical case items directly on the Case record page using standard related lists or lookups, all configured through the point-and-click interface rather than custom code.
The provided landscape diagram illustrates a clear path from Salesforce through middleware to the Historical Data Store. Option A leverages this by using the ESB to bridge the protocol gap. Because the data store is already "fine-tuned to be performant with search queries," Salesforce Connect can efficiently query only the specific historical records needed for the current case view.
In contrast, Option B requires a "Request and Reply" pattern using Apex callouts and custom Lightning components. While functional, this is a code-heavy approach that increases technical debt and does not meet the "maximize declarative configuration" requirement. Option C, using "Fire and Forget" with Platform Events, is unsuitable for a synchronous "view data" request; Platform Events are asynchronous and would require a complex, custom-built UI to "wait" for and display the response. Therefore, the combination of OData and Salesforce Connect provides the most seamless, scalable, and low-maintenance solution for call center agents.
質問 # 42
A company's cloud-based single page application consolidates data local to the application with data from on-premise and Third-party systems. The diagram below typifies the application's combined use of synchronous and asynchronous calls. The company wants to use the average response time of its application's user interface as a basis for certain alerts. For this purpose, the following occurs:
Log every call start and finish date and time to a central analytics data store.
Compute response time uniformly as the difference between the start and finish date and time (A to H in the diagram).
Which computation represents the end-to-end response time from the user's perspective?
正解：B
質問 # 43
An integration architect has designed a mobile application for Salesforce users to get data while on the road using a custom user interface (UI). The application is secured with OAuth and is currently functioning well. There is a new requirement where the mobile application needs to obtain the GPS coordinates and store them on a custom geolocation field. The geolocation field is secured with field-level security, so users can view the value without changing it. What should be don4e to meet the requirement?
正解：A
解説：
When a custom mobile application already secured with OAuth needs to update a record in Salesforce, the standard architectural recommendation is to use the REST API. The REST API is optimized for mobile environments because it uses lightweight JSON payloads and follows standard HTTP methods (such as PATCH for updates), which are highly compatible with mobile development frameworks.
In this specific scenario, the architect must address the Field-Level Security (FLS) constraint. Because the geolocation field is set to read-only for users, a standard UI-based update would typically fail. However, when using an inbound REST API call with a properly authorized integration user or via a "System Mode" context (if utilizing a custom Apex REST resource), the system can be configured to bypass UI-level restrictions while maintaining data integrity.
The mobile device captures the coordinates via the device's native GPS capabilities and initiates an inbound call to the Salesforce REST endpoint. Option A (Apex inbound call) is a subset of REST functionality but is only necessary if complex server-side logic is required that the standard REST API cannot handle. Option C is technically incorrect as mobile devices do not typically "receive" callouts from Salesforce in this pattern; they initiate the requests. By leveraging the standard REST API, the architect ensures a scalable, secure, and standardized integration that adheres to Salesforce's mobile-first integration principles.
質問 # 44
......
Plat-Arch-204試験復習赤本: https://www.pass4test.jp/Plat-Arch-204.html
さらに、Pass4Test Plat-Arch-204ダンプの一部が現在無料で提供されています：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1c7Hp7k-lolQemUzAJGTkfW-ksxZ2wKf6