Pass the Salesforce Developers PDII Questions and answers with CertsForce

56

In a source-driven development workflow, the "source of truth" is a version control system, and the primary interface for interacting with the Salesforce platform is the Salesf7orce DX CLI (Option C).8

When a deployment is initiated (using commands like project deploy start or the legacy force:source:deploy), the CLI provides real-time feedback on the status of the deployment. To verify a successful deployment, the CLI returns a detailed summary of the metadata components successfully created or updated, as well as the results of any Apex tests that were required to run as part of the production deployment. If any part of the deployment fails, the CLI provides specific error messages and line numbers, and the entire transaction is rolled back.

Option B (Apex Test Execution) is a component of the verification process, but the CLI is the tool that manages and reports on the overall success. Option A (Migration Tool) is a legacy Ant-based tool that is not the standard for modern source-driven DX projects. Option D is a browser extension for data and metadata inspection but is not a deployment or verification tool. The Salesforce CLI is the backbone of modern CI/CD pipelines and the essential mechanism for verifying deployment integrity.

To build a maintainable and scalable solution, a developer must separate business logic from trigger execution and avoid hard-coding threshold values.

First, the $1,000,000 threshold should be stored in Custom Metadata (Option B). Custom Metadata is superior to hard-coding or even Custom Settings in this context because the records are deployable and can be queried efficiently without counting against standard SOQL limits. If the business decides to lower the "high value" threshold to $500,000, an administrator can simply update the Custom Metadata record without requiring any code changes or redeployments.

Second, the logic to identify these opportunities should be moved to a Helper Class (Option D). This follows the "Separation of Concerns" principle. Instead of writing the SOQL query and logic inside the trigger, the trigger calls a method in the helper class. Similarly, the Lightning Web Component's Apex controller can call the exact same method in the helper class. This ensures that the definition of a "high value opportunity" is managed in one single place in the codebase. If the logic becomes more complex (e.g., adding Industry filters), the developer only needs to update the helper class once to satisfy both the trigger and the UI component. Option A leads to "spaghetti code," and Option C is impossible as triggers cannot be called directly from JavaScript or other Apex classes.

==========

Asynchronous methods, such as those annotated with @future, do not run immediately when called in Apex. Instead, they are added to a queue to be processed when system resources become available. In a unit test, if you call a future method and immediately query the database for the result, the future method likely hasn't executed yet, resulting in the "0" value observed in the assertion.

To test asynchronous code, you must wrap the call within Test.startTest() and Test.stopTest() (Option D). When the code reaches Test.stopTest(), the execution of the test script pauses, and the system forces all queued asynchronous jobs (future methods, batch jobs, queueable jobs) to run to completion synchronously.

By placing the AuditUtil.incrementViewed(acct.Id) call inside this block, you ensure that by the time the next line of code (the SOQL query) runs, the increment logic has finished and the database reflects the new value. Option B is incorrect because inserting the account is a synchronous operation that doesn't require the stopTest wait. Option A and C avoid the problem rather than testing the logic correctly. Option D is the standard platform-required pattern for testing asynchronous side effects.

This scenario illustrates a classic trigger recursion issue triggered by the Salesforce Order of Execution. When a record is updated, Salesforce runs through a specific sequence: first, it executes "Before-Save" Record-Triggered Flows, then "Before" triggers, followed by "After" triggers, and finally "After-Save" flows and processes. If a process or flow updates the same record that initiated the transaction, the entire cycle of Apex triggers can be re-invoked within that single transaction.

To prevent logic from running multiple times during these re-entrant cycles, developers implement a static boolean variable as a "recursion guard." Static variables in Apex persist for the entire duration of a single transaction. By checking the value of a static boolean at the start of the trigger, the code can determine if it has already processed the current set of records.

Option B is the correct implementation of this pattern. It defines `public static Boolean firstRun = true;` in the handler class. The trigger checks if `firstRun` is true, executes the handler logic, and then immediately sets `firstRun` to false. Any subsequent execution of the Case trigger within the same transaction will find the variable set to false and skip the increment logic.

Option A is incorrect because it resets `firstRun` to true every time the trigger starts, defeating the guard. Option C incorrectly uses an instance variable (non-static), which is recreated for every call. Option D uses a local variable within the trigger body, which is re-initialized to true every time the trigger fires, providing no protection against recursion.

Co6mprehensive and Detailed 150 to 250 words of Explanation:

To prevent race conditions in Salesforce, where two or more concurrent transactions attempt to update the same record simultaneously, a developer must implement record locking. In SOQL, this is achieved using the FOR UPDATE keyword.

When a query includes the FOR UPDATE clause, the platform places an exclusive lock on the returned records for the duration of the transaction. If another process attempts to update these records or lock them with its own FOR UPDATE query, it will be forced to wait until the first transaction completes (commits or rolls back). If the lock is not released within 10 seconds, the second process will receive a QueryException.

Option A is the correct syntax to ensure that the Credit_Memo__c records are "reserved" for the current logic, preventing other threads from interfering with the newAmount calculation or update. Option B (USING SCOPE) is used for filtering records based on predefined ownership scopes like "My Terrace." Options C and D (FOR REFERENCE and FOR VIEW) are used to update the "Last Referenced" or "Last Viewed" timestamps on records, respectively, and do not provide the row-level locking required to prevent data concurrency issues or race conditions.

When you need to retrieve the total count of records in a large dataset (millions of records), a SOQL aggregate query using COUNT() (Option A) is the most efficient and performant method. Salesforce optimizes aggregate functions at the database 13level. Unlike a standard query that returns in14dividual records and counts against the "50,000 SOQL rows" limit, a COUNT() query returns a single integ15er result and counts as only one row to16ward the governor limits.17

This allows a developer to count millions of records in a single synchronous transactio18n without hitting row limits or causing significant CPU time issues. Option D (SOQL for loop) is the worst approach, as it would attempt to load every individual record into memory, hitting the 50,000-row limit almost immediately and likely causing a LimitException or Request Timeout.

Option B (Batch Apex) is unnecessary for a simple count and is much slower because it runs asynchronously. Option C (SUM) is used for adding up values in numeric fields, not for counting the number of records. For high-volume record counting, SELECT COUNT(Id) FROM Opportunity is the platform-standard approach to provide data to a Lightning component efficiently.

Comprehensive and Detailed 150 to 250 words of Explanation:

To 41ensure "all-or-nothing" behavior across multiple, distinct DML operations (such as an insert followed by a delete), a developer must manage the transaction boundary manually. In Apex, while a single insert statement is atomic, multiple statements are not automatically linked; if the second statement fails, the first statement's changes would typically remain committed to the database.

The correct implementation is to use Savepoints (Option B). By calling Database.setSavepoint(), the developer marks a specific state of the database. All subsequent DML operations are wrapped in a try-catch block. If an exception occurs during any of the operations, the code enters the catch block, where Database.rollback(sp) is called. This command reverts the database to the exact state it was in when the savepoint was created, effectively undoing any successful DML that occurred before the error.

Option A (SaveResults) allows for partial success, which contradicts the requirement to "prevent all execution." Option C (manual cleanup) is error-prone and cannot reliably revert system-generated fields or complex triggers. Option D (addError) is used in triggers to block a transaction but does not provide the programmatic rollback control needed for general Apex logic involving multiple lists.

In Visualforce, the standard behavior for an <apex:commandButton> is to perform a full page postback. To convert this into an asynchronous (AJAX) request that only updates a specific portion of the page, the developer must use the reRender attribute (D). By setting reRender="opportunityList" on the command button, the developer instructs the platform to capture the server's response and update only the DOM element with that specific ID, rather than refreshing the entire browser window.

While Option C (returning null from the search method) is a requirement for staying on the same page, it does not prevent the full refresh by itself. Option A (<apex:actionRegion>) is used to limit which part of the form's data is sent to the server for processing (to avoid validation errors on unrelated fields), but it does not control which part of the page is re-drawn on the client. Option B (<apex:actionFunction>) is a way to call Apex from JavaScript but doesn't solve the button's refresh behavior directly. Implementing reRender is the standard and most efficient way to achieve the "partial refresh" UX in Visualforce, significantly improving the perceived performance and user experience by reducing the amount of data and UI flickering during search operations.

==========

58

This requirement addresses two distinct needs: a user interface for59 data collection and a technical solution for long-running HTTP callouts.

First, a Lightning Web Component (Option B) or a Screen Flow (Option C) could both be used to collect inputs. However, in the context of advanced development and the specific use of "Continuation," a Lightning Web Component is the standard modern pairing. It allows for a rich, interactive UI to gather the "key inputs" from the user.

Second, for the long-running callout, the developer should use an Apex method that returns a Continuation object (Option D). Standard synchronous callouts in Salesforce have a timeout limit (typically 10 seconds, max 120) and, more importantly, they "hold" a thread in the Salesforce application server. If many users perform long callouts simultaneously, the org can hit the "Concurrent Request" limit, blocking other users. The Continuation class allows the request to be handed off to a specialized Salesforce service that waits for the response asynchronously. Once the external service responds, the Continuation service "wakes up" the Apex callback method. This pattern is essential for long-running integrations as it doesn't count against concurrent request limits while the external system is processing, providing a much more scalable user experience.

==========

###

In Aura components, Salesforce provides specific interfaces that "inject" context into the component automatically. The developer is already using force:hasRecordId, which automatically populates a recordId attribute with the ID of the current record.

To get the API Name of the sObject (e.g., "Account" or "Contact") without writing Apex code or requiring manual configuration in the App Builder, the developer should implement force:hasSObjectName (Option D). When this interface is added to the implements attribute, the framework automatically provides an attribute named sObjectName to the component.

This is the most efficient solution because:

It is purely declarative and handled by the Lightning framework.

It requires zero Apex code, meaning there is no need for additional unit tests or code coverage (satisfying the requirement "without requiring additional test coverage").

It makes the component truly reusable; you can drop it on an Account page, a Contact page, or any custom object page, and it will immediately know which object it is currently displaying.

Options A and B require manual configuration or hardcoding, which reduces reusability. Option C requires an Apex call, which adds complexity and necessitates writing test classes for coverage.