Development-Lifecycle-and-Deployment-Architect Salesforce Certified Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect (WI25) Questions and Answers

Escalating and communicating to stakeholders the risk and mitigating it by allocating additional resources or extending the timeline of the project to support the new requirement based on stakeholders’ input are two actions that should be performed to mitigate the risk. These actions help to manage the scope change and ensure that the project is delivered with the expected quality and functionality.

The best way to stop the rollbacks from happening is to ensure report metadata is exported daily and that it is merged into the developer branches before the next release. This way, the reports and dashboards will be up to date and consistent across all environments. Using a third-party data warehouse is not a solution, as it does not address the root cause of the rollbacks. Removing the executive’s ability to change reports is not a good practice, as it limits their flexibility and autonomy. Backing up and reimporting the reports before and after the release is not a reliable or scalable solution, as it can introduce errors and inconsistencies.

The Service Cloud developer will see the conflict and need to resolve it when they create a pull request from ServiceCase to UCDev in GitHub. A pull request is a way of proposing changes to a branch and requesting a review and merge from another branch. GitHub will show any conflicts that prevent the pull request from being merged automatically, and the developer will need to resolve them manually before the merge can happen.

: Storing the records in sandboxes and production is not a good practice, as it can lead to data inconsistencies and conflicts. Storing the records in a version control system is a better option, as it allows tracking changes and deploying them to different environments. Using a third-party product to manage these records is also a valid option, as it can provide features such as data backup, restore, and migration.

Manually validating change sets before deployment is a recommended practice to avoid possible delays while deploying a change set, as it can help you identify and resolve any errors or dependencies before the actual deployment. Change set performance is not independent of included components, as some components may take longer to deploy than others. Manually creating new custom objects and new custom fields or manually applying the field type changes are not advisable, as they can introduce human errors and inconsistencies between environments. See Deploy Changes with Change Sets for more details.

The three benefits of using a partner development org over an individual development org in this scenario are:

Partner development org has a greater number of licenses available for the team. This means that the developers can test their app with different user profiles and permissions, and also invite beta testers to provide feedback2.

Partner development org offers higher API limit. This means that the developers can use more API calls to integrate their app with external systems or services, and also leverage the Salesforce APIs to automate their development and deployment processes2.

Partner development org offers more storage. This means that the developers can store more data and files in their org, and also use more features and components that require storage, such as Big Objects, Platform Events, or Lightning Web Components2.

The other options are not benefits of using a partner development org over an individual development org in this scenario, because:

Only partner development org supports managed beta testing. This is not true, as both partner development org and individual development org can create and distribute managed beta packages3.

Partner development org never expires. This is also not true, as partner development orgs have a 12-month expiration period, which can be extended by request

The most important factor to consider before recommending Performance testing is the number of concurrent transactions, as this will affect the response time and throughput of the system. Option A is not relevant, as unit tests are used to verify the functionality and quality of the code, not the performance. Option B is not related, as Apex Hammer failures are used to check the compatibility of the code with new platform releases, not the performance. Option C is not helpful, as debug log entries are used to troubleshoot errors and issues, not the performance.

 Creating a Center of Excellence with a charter document is a recommended practice for managing multiple projects and aligning them with the business goals and roadmap. A Center of Excellence is a cross-functional team that provides guidance, support, and governance for the Salesforce ecosystem. A charter document defines the vision, mission, roles, and responsibilities of the Center of Excellence.

 The success criteria for data migration and the manual and automated data validation approaches are two key areas of UC’s data migration test plan that should be included. The success criteria define the expected outcomes and quality standards for the data migration process. The data validation approaches ensure that the data is accurate, complete, and consistent after the migration.

 The two deployment tools that will support the request are the ANT Migration Tool and VS Code with Salesforce Extension. These tools allow the developers to deploy metadata components from one Salesforce org to another, and also to maintain and modify the code locally in their own machines. Change Sets and Developer Console are not suitable for this scenario, because they do not support deploying to multiple orgs or working offline.

Implementing the change in the sandbox, validating, and releasing to production and considering that the integration with the ERP system may not function as expected are two considerations when addressing the requirement. The change should be performed in the sandbox first, as it is a best practice to test any changes in a non-production environment before deploying them to production. The change may also affect the integration with the ERP system, as it may require updating the mappings, validations, or transformations between the two systems.

To move to the package development model, the administrator must enable both the Dev Hub and the Second-Generation Managed Packages in setup. The Dev Hub is the main org where the administrator can create and manage scratch orgs and packages. The Second-Generation Managed Packages are the new format of packages that support modular development and versioning. The Unlocked Packages are a type of second-generation packages that are not tied to a namespace and can be installed and customized in any org. The Source Tracking for Scratch Orgs is a feature that allows the administrator to track the changes made in a scratch org and push or pull them to or from a source repository.

 D is the correct answer, as the risk with this plan is that multiple work-streams with dependencies could impact the go-live. If the legacy system upgrade and the new integration are not aligned and coordinated, there could be delays, errors, or failures in the project delivery. A is incorrect, as the deadline being scheduled during a Salesforce release is not a risk, but an opportunity to leverage the new features and enhancements that Salesforce provides. B is incorrect, as the project team using the Waterfall methodology is not a risk, but a choice that depends on the project scope, complexity, and requirements. C is incorrect, as the legacy system team using an Agile methodology is not a risk, but a choice that depends on the project scope, complexity, and requirements. You can learn more about the risk management in the Project Management Strategies for Salesforce Implementations module on Trailhead.

The evidence that can support the CTO’s claims is a burndown chart showing the team misses their forecast sprint after sprint. This indicates that the team is overcommitting and not able to deliver the work they planned. The definition of done, the Kanban board, and the burndown chart showing the team finishes early are not relevant to the CTO’s claims, as they do not reflect the actual progress and performance of the team.

 In the Metadata API, the External Object metadata type represents external objects. In the Metadata API, the Custom Object metadata type represents external objects.

 The sfdx force:source:retrieve command is used to retrieve the metadata from an org to a local project directory. However, before running this command, the developer needs to create a project using the sfdx force:project:create command, and then navigate to the project directory using the cd command. If the developer hasn’t done these steps, they will get the error message: “This command is required to run from within an SFDX project”. The -n option is not required for the sfdx force:project:create command, as it will prompt the developer to enter a project name interactively. The developer can create the project within VSCode and run the command in a separate terminal, as long as they are in the same project directory.

A suitable branching policy to recommend for multiple development teams that work on separate streams of work, with different timelines, is trunk-based development. This policy allows each team to work on their own feature branches, and merge them to the main branch (trunk) frequently, using pull requests and code reviews. This can help avoid merge conflicts, ensure code quality, and enable continuous integration and delivery. Leaf-based development is not a valid branching policy, as it is a term used to describe the nodes in a tree data structure. GitHub flow is a specific implementation of trunk-based development, but it is not a branching policy by itself. Scratch-org-based development is not a branching policy, but a development model that uses scratch orgs as ephemeral environments. See Trunk-Based Development for more details.

The Tooling API is the best choice for the team that wants to use SOQL queries to retrieve and make changes to smaller pieces of Salesforce metadata through their Java application. The Tooling API provides access to metadata objects such as Apex classes, triggers, workflows, validation rules, custom objects, and fields. It also supports CRUD operations, as well as executing anonymous Apex code. The other APIs are not suitable for this use case, as they either deal with larger metadata components (Metadata API), user interface components (User Interface API), or data records (Any Salesforce API).

 To reduce defects, the architect should recommend increasing the code coverage to 95% and adding more details to the acceptance criteria. Increasing the code coverage can help ensure that the code is thoroughly tested and meets the quality standards. Adding more details to the acceptance criteria can help clarify the requirements and expectations for the functionality. Using the test script to define the test classes or having the test analyst create the test classes are not good practices, as they can introduce errors and inconsistencies in the testing process.

A virtual Kanban board tool is a good way to increase transparency and collaboration among agile development teams, as it allows them to visualize their work, track their progress, and identify any bottlenecks or issues. A daily stand-up meeting, a daily email, or a shared spreadsheet are not as effective or efficient as a Kanban board tool.

The partner can use Developer Edition or Partner Developer Edition for development of the managed package. These environments allow the creation of a namespace and the packaging of components into a managed package. Developer sandbox and Developer Pro sandbox do not support these features and are not suitable for developing a managed package.

Deploying unsupported components manually before/after deployment is the best way to address the issue of Metadata API not supporting all the components yet. Metadata API is a powerful tool for deploying changes between orgs, but it does not cover all the metadata types that are available in Salesforce. Some examples of unsupported components are email templates, dashboards, reports, and custom settings. These components need to be deployed manually by using other tools or methods, such as change sets, data loader, or manual configuration.

B and D are the correct answers, as partner developer edition orgs and developer edition orgs are the appropriate environments for creating a managed package. A managed package is a collection of application components that are locked and versioned, and can be installed and upgraded in multiple orgs. A is incorrect, as developer pro sandbox orgs are not suitable for creating a managed package, as they are copies of a production org that are used for development and testing purposes. C is incorrect, as production orgs with LMA are not suitable for creating a managed package, as they are used for managing the licenses and subscribers of a managed package. You can learn more about this topic in the Package Development Model module on Trailhead.

The best solution to address the problem of user testing taking a long time due to data setup is to include automated sample data during deployment. This way, the users can have realistic and consistent data to test the functionality and performance of the system. Assigning more users to create test data, testing data creation being outside the scope of continuous integration, or training business users to create test data more efficiently are not effective solutions, as they still require manual effort and may result in inconsistent or inaccurate data.

 Using a Source Control system alongside a multi-sandbox development strategy has several advantages, such as performing code reviews before promoting to a pre-production sandbox, keeping a history of changes made by each developer, and creating a branching strategy that tracks each feature or change separately. Automatically deploying changes from sandbox to production is not an advantage of Source Control, but rather a function of a Continuous Integration tool. Acting as a backup in case of catastrophic data loss is not an advantage of Source Control, but rather a benefit of having a sandbox strategy.

A workflow and a trigger are considered minor changes that do not require alignment with a Salesforce major or patch release. However, they still need proper testing, training, and change management before being deployed to production. Therefore, the architect should plan this as a minor release with training and change management.

To deploy custom metadata types to production using Metadata API, you need to include the CustomMetadata and CustomField data types. CustomMetadata represents the custom metadata type definition, and CustomField represents the custom metadata type fields. CustomMetadataType and CustomObject are not valid data types for custom metadata types

 Executing all test classes in sandboxes can help identify and fix any errors or failures before deploying to production. Executing selected test classes in production can help reduce the deployment time and avoid running unnecessary tests.

Multiple triggers on the same object can cause conflicts and performance issues. Multiple unit test failures can indicate poor code quality and lack of maintenance. Duplicated logic across Visualforce pages and Apex classes can lead to inconsistency and redundancy.

The architect should suggest the following actions to help UC discover the failing unit tests earlier: Train the administrators to make their changes in a special “admin changes” sandbox, and then promote to production, and ensure a metadata backup is committed to version control every day and a diff published to the release team. Training the administrators to use a sandbox can help prevent direct changes to production that can break the code or the unit tests. Ensuring a metadata backup and a diff can help identify any changes that have been made to production and compare them with the source of truth.

 A and C are the correct answers, as they are the methods that should be used to mitigate the risk of code being overwritten by a large development team in a single developer pro sandbox. A is correct, as providing each developer their own sandbox developer org and implementing a code repository and continuous integration to merge code into the developer pro sandbox can help to isolate the changes, avoid conflicts, and ensure consistency and quality. C is correct, as using a single sandbox and strictly coordinating development across shared components, and implementing a code repository to allow developers to merge code into a common repository can help to manage the changes, prevent overwriting, and ensure version control and integration. B is incorrect, as replacing the developer pro sandbox with a partial copy sandbox is not a method that can mitigate the risk of code being overwritten, as it does not address the issue of multiple developers working on the same components, but only provides a larger data set for testing. D is incorrect, as providing each developer their own sandbox developer org, and implementing managed packages to deploy to the merge is not a method that can mitigate the risk of code being overwritten, as it does not allow for easy updates and modifications, but only creates locked and versioned components. You can learn more about this topic in the Application Lifecycle and Deployment module on Trailhead.

The product team should review the Checkmarx errors and determine if they need to fix them or not. If the errors are false positives, meaning that they do not indicate a real security issue, the product team should mark them as such and attach an explanation, then submit the security review. This will help the Salesforce security review team to understand the rationale behind the code and avoid unnecessary rejections. The product team should not leave the errors to the Salesforce security review team, as they may reject the request if they find any potential security issue. The product team should not leave a partner support case, as this is not the proper channel for resolving code issues. The product team should not fix all the errors before submitting the security review, as some of them may not be relevant or critical, and fixing them may introduce new bugs or delays.

C and D are the best approaches to develop customizations once and make them available in both orgs, as they use packages that can be installed and updated in multiple orgs. A is not a good approach, as it does not allow for versioning and dependency management of the customizations. B is not a good approach, as it does not support deploying metadata components between orgs.

Tracking effort estimates, actuals, and remaining work can help the developer improve their estimation skills and accuracy, which can benefit the project planning and delivery.

C is the correct answer, as creating a custom metadata type and including this in your deployment to production is the best way to manage this deployment. A custom metadata type is a metadata component that can store important configuration data, such as custom settings, and can be deployed along with other components, such as Apex classes. A is incorrect, as scripting the deployment of all functionality via the Force.com Migration Tool is not a good way to manage this deployment, as it does not address the issue of deploying the custom settings that hold the configuration data. B is incorrect, as manually deploying and populating custom settings in production using a change set is not a good way to manage this deployment, as it can introduce errors and inconsistencies, as well as require additional steps and permissions. D is incorrect, as manually deploying and populating the custom settings in production prior to the Apex class deployment is not a good way to manage this deployment, as it can create dependency and timing issues, as well as require additional steps and permissions. You can learn more about this topic in the [Custom Metadata Types] module on Trailhead.

D is the correct answer, as automated testing is the best approach to mitigate the risk of bugs being inadvertently introduced to production. Automated testing can help to ensure that the code meets the quality and functionality standards, as well as detect and prevent any errors or regressions before deploying to production. A is incorrect, as user acceptance testing is not enough to mitigate the risk of bugs, as it depends on the manual testing and feedback of the end users, which can be subjective and incomplete. B is incorrect, as the use of an agile methodology is not directly related to mitigating the risk of bugs, as it is a way of managing the project scope, requirements, and delivery. C is incorrect, as requirements traceability is not directly related to mitigating the risk of bugs, as it is a way of tracking the requirements and their fulfillment. You can learn more about this topic in the Testing Strategies module on Trailhead.

This is the correct answer because utilizing unit and functional test automation as part of a continuous integration strategy can prevent regression by ensuring that the code and configuration are always tested and validated before deployment. Utilizing the developer console to run test suites is not sufficient and may not cover all the functionality. Utilizing Salesforce Apex Hammer is not a feasible option as it is an internal tool that Salesforce uses to test customer orgs before major releases. Freezing development of new features and re-architecting the system is not a realistic or cost-effective approach to prevent regression.

The fastest approach to spin off a sandbox with up to 10,000 records in each object for testing the integration performance is to spin off a partial copy sandbox using a sandbox template with all the objects required for testing the integration. A partial copy sandbox can copy up to 10,000 records per object using a sandbox template that specifies the objects and fields to copy. A partial copy sandbox can also copy the metadata and the configuration settings from the production org. A developer pro sandbox, a development sandbox, or a full copy sandbox may not be able to copy enough data for testing the integration performance, as they have lower data storage limits. A developer pro sandbox and a development sandbox can only copy 1 GB of data, while a full copy sandbox can only copy 5 GB of data. A full copy sandbox may also take longer to spin-off, as it copies all the data and metadata from the production org.

The architect should recommend that UC start a citizen development program to minimize additional costs and allow UC to accomplish more from the backlog. A citizen development program is a way of empowering non-technical users to create and deploy simple applications using low-code or no-code tools, such as Salesforce Platform. This can help UC leverage the skills and knowledge of their existing workforce, reduce the workload of the development team, and deliver value faster to the business.

Creating an unmanaged package of the app and deploying it in NTO’s org is the best option for having ETO’s Sales Optimization app in NTO’s Salesforce org in the shortest possible time. An unmanaged package is a collection of components that can be easily installed and customized in another org. Unlike a managed package, an unmanaged package does not have any restrictions or dependencies on the source org, and does not require a security review or approval from Salesforce. Creating a managed package, creating users in ETO’s org, or building the app from scratch in NTO’s org are not as fast or efficient as creating an unmanaged package.

The best way to ensure that tests execute predictably is to ensure that unit tests generate their own test data, as this will avoid any dependency on the existing data or metadata in the org, which may vary across environments3. Option A is not correct, as ensuring that Record Type IDs match both Production and Sandbox orgs is not a reliable way to ensure test predictability, as Record Type IDs are not guaranteed to be the same across orgs, and may change due to refreshes or deployments4. Option B is not correct, as ensuring executed Apex test run as valid users is not a sufficient way to ensure test predictability, as valid users may have different permissions or profiles across orgs, and may not have access to the required data or metadata5. Option D is not correct, as ensuring unit tests execute with seeAllData=true is not a recommended way to ensure test predictability, as this will make the tests dependent on the existing data in the org, which may not be consistent or isolated.

Refreshing a sandbox during the release preview window to ensure they have the upcoming release is a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it allows them to test their application in an environment that matches the production environment after the upgrade. Running regression tests in an upgraded sandbox to detect any issues with the upgrade is also a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it helps them to verify that the existing functionality is not affected by the new features or changes introduced by the upgrade. Reviewing the release notes for automatically-enabled features and technical debt is also a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it helps them to understand the impact and benefits of the new features or changes, as well as to identify and resolve any technical debt that may cause issues or conflicts with the upgrade. Contacting Salesforce to schedule a time to upgrade the full sandbox is not a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it is not possible to request a specific time for the upgrade of the full sandbox, which is determined by Salesforce and depends on the release window and the pod assignment. Upgrading any SOAP integrations to the newest WSDL as early as possible is not a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it is not necessary to upgrade the SOAP integrations to the newest WSDL, unless they want to use the new features or fields introduced by the upgrade. The SOAP integrations will continue to work with the previous WSDL versions, as they are backward compatible.

The best practice for releasing near peak business periods is to avoid doing so, as it can cause disruption and risk to the business operations. Making declarative changes in production, bypassing regression testing, and having developers conduct user acceptance testing are all bad practices that can introduce errors and instability to the system.

Using static code analysis to enforce coding standards is the best way to improve consistency among the development teams working on different projects. Static code analysis is a tool that can automatically scan the code and detect any violations of the predefined coding rules and best practices. It can also provide feedback and suggestions to the developers on how to improve their code quality and readability. Creating a Center of Excellence for release management, requiring pull requests to be reviewed by two developers before merging, or executing regression testing before code can be committed are also good practices, but they are not as effective or efficient as static code analysis for ensuring coding consistency.

 The best way to address the issue of hitting governor limits while testing Apex classes is to use test.startTest() and test.stopTest() methods to reset governor limits. These methods mark the start and end of the test code, and allow you to run your test code with a separate set of governor limits. There is no AppExchange product that can temporarily increase the governor limits, and there is no auto reset property or test.setLimit() and test.resetLimit() methods that can reset governor limits.

3020

The advantages of the package development model are improving team development and collaboration, facilitating automated testing and continuous integration, and significantly reducing the need for manually tracking changes. The package development model allows the developers to work on modular and reusable components that can be easily tested and deployed. The package development model does not eliminate the need of using change sets, as they can still be used for deploying non-packaged components or metadata. The package development model does not provide its own source control, but rather relies on external source control systems such as Git.

Creating design standards focused on integration and providing training to all teams is the best way to address the challenges of having various integration patterns and a lack of common understanding of the integration landscape. Design standards can help to establish consistent and best practices for integrating Salesforce with other systems, such as choosing the appropriate integration style, pattern, tool, and protocol. Training can help to educate and align the teams on the design standards and the integration architecture.

The best deployment tool for UC to use to manage their deployment process in an automated fashion is the Force.com Migration Tool, as it is a command-line tool that uses the Metadata API to deploy components from one org to another, and can be integrated with version control systems and continuous integration servers. Option A is not a good choice, as Workbench is a web-based tool that does not support automation or scripting. Option C is not a good choice, as Change Sets are a point-and-click tool that require manual steps to create and deploy. Option D is not a good choice, as Force.com IDE is a desktop tool that does not support automation or scripting.

 In the post refresh plan, modifying external ids to a known valid set of values for UAT is the best way to resolve the issue of objects that have external ids from production no longer pointing to valid external ids in the UAT environment. This way, the data integrity and consistency across the integrated systems can be maintained. Letting UAT point to production integrations and rolling back each transaction after it finishes is not a good practice, as it can cause data loss or corruption in production. Deleting all the data and using an automated testing tool to create new data across all the systems in UAT is not feasible, as it can take a lot of time and resources. Masking the external id so nobody can see the production value is not a solution, as it does not address the underlying problem of invalid references.

This is the correct answer because some components, such as custom settings, user permissions, and email templates, cannot be deployed via the Metadata API. Therefore, these components should be documented and manually deployed or configured in the target environment.

 A and B are the best techniques to ensure a smooth and timely deployment, as they ensure that the code is consistent, version-controlled, and validated against the target environment. C is not a good technique, as it creates an unnecessary sandbox that does not reflect the production environment. D is not a good technique, as it does not allow for testing and validation before deploying to production.

This is the correct answer because a partial copy sandbox can provide a subset of production data that is refreshed every 5 days. This way, the user acceptance and functional teams can test independently in isolation, and on current production data that was modified within the last week. A developer pro sandbox has a limited data storage and cannot store enough data for testing. A developer sandbox has no data and is only suitable for development and testing of code. A full sandbox can provide a complete copy of production data, but it can only be refreshed every 29 days, which may not meet the requirement of testing on data that was modified within the last week.

This is the correct answer because having developers work in separate branches and merge their changes in a common branch for testing can reduce the risk of overwriting others’ changes and ensure code quality and consistency. Having all developers work in the same branch or in the HEAD may cause conflicts and errors. Not using source control is not a good practice and may result in data loss and lack of version control.

The architect should recommend using Git to create a release branch from the develop branch. All fixes must be made in the release branch. After deployment, merge release with develop. This strategy allows the team to isolate the changes that are ready for deployment from the changes that are still in progress. It also ensures that the fixes are applied to both the release and the develop branches. The other options do not follow the best practices of Git branching and merging.

 Three advantages of using the SFDX are: can store code on a local machine, or a version control system; can create scratch orgs; and can install application metadata from a central repository. These advantages can help improve the development experience, as they allow developers to work with source-driven development, use ephemeral and configurable environments, and access metadata components from a shared location. Can quickly deploy metadata using Execute Anonymous is not an advantage of using the SFDX, as Execute Anonymous is a feature of the Developer Console that allows running Apex code, not deploying metadata. Can use native Deployment Rollback Tool to quickly revert to prior state is also not an advantage of using the SFDX, as there is no such tool in the SFDX. See [Salesforce DX] for more details.

Using continuous integration with automation testing is a development practice that will help to reduce the amount of bugs, as it allows the code to be built and tested frequently and automatically. Encouraging the development team to do peer code review is a development practice that will help to reduce the amount of bugs, as it allows the code to be checked and improved by other developers. Incorporating test-driven development into the project structure is a development practice that will help to reduce the amount of bugs, as it requires the developers to write tests before writing code and ensure that the code meets the test criteria. Enabling the development team to be self-organizing is not a development practice that will help to reduce the amount of bugs, as it does not directly affect the quality of the code. Enabling a short and timely feedback loop with customers is not a development practice that will help to reduce the amount of bugs, as it does not directly affect the quality of the code.

Apex CPU limits and HTTP response size are two limitations that an architect should consider when designing a strategy for managing technical reference data, with multiple related objects. Apex CPU limits may be exceeded if the data retrieval or manipulation logic is complex or inefficient. HTTP response size may be too large if the data payload contains many related objects or fields. Circular relationships and depth of nested relationships are not limitations, but design considerations that may affect the data model and query performance.

 Creating a governance process requiring all projects to create project deliverable documentation is an option that an Architect should recommend, as it helps to ensure that the code and configuration are well documented and maintained, and that the administrators can understand the rationale and impact of the changes. Creating a standard method for deprecating classes and fields using design standards is also an option that an Architect should recommend, as it helps to avoid cluttering the org with unused or obsolete metadata, and to improve the performance and security of the application. Creating an adoption plan for end users using Salesforce dashboards and reports is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it does not address the issue of how objects and fields are being used and how future implementations can be maintained. Creating a design standard requiring integration to use declarative configuration patterns is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it does not address the issue of how objects and fields are being used and how future implementations can be maintained. Creating a governance framework focused on high-level business strategy and goals is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it does not address the issue of how objects and fields are being used and how future implementations can be maintained.

The best strategy to delete the day’s test data in a partial copy sandbox every night is to execute a batch job that deletes all records created on the day. This way, you can automate the process of cleaning up the test data and avoid manual work. Manually deleting all records individually is time-consuming and error-prone. Creating a new developer copy sandbox every night is unnecessary and wasteful, as developer copy sandboxes have limited storage and functionality. Refreshing the sandbox every night is also not feasible, as partial copy sandboxes have a refresh interval of 5 days.

The best option is to ensure the sandbox will be on the release preview, which means it will be upgraded to the new platform release before the production environment. This will allow the team to test the deployment in a realistic scenario and catch any potential issues. Option A is not ideal, as the staging and production support sandboxes will not be on the same platform version as the production environment. Option C is also not ideal, as the production support sandbox will not be on the same platform version as the production environment. Option D is risky, as the staging sandbox refresh may not complete in time for the go-live.

Pairing with the administrator and reviewing each change as it happens is the best way to handle the situation of discovering a Sev0 defect in production. This way, the architect can ensure that the changes are done correctly and quickly, without compromising the quality or security of the application. The architect can also provide guidance and feedback to the administrator, as well as monitor the impact and outcome of the changes. Denying the suggestion, explaining that only developers are certified to make changes, or calling the security team are not advisable actions, as they can delay the resolution of the defect, increase the damage, or create unnecessary conflict.

 The change set performance may depend on the included components, especially if they are complex or have many dependencies. The change set may take more time than usual if it includes changes to permission sets and profiles, as these components require additional validation and processing. The change set may not take more time if it includes field type changes, new custom objects and fields, or other simple components.

A Center of Excellence is a mechanism that can help to increase the use of standard Salesforce functionality, by defining and managing best practices, standards, and governance across the organization. A Center of Excellence can also facilitate cross-functional collaboration, knowledge sharing, and alignment of Salesforce initiatives with business goals. A Change Control Board is a group of stakeholders that reviews and approves changes to the system, but does not necessarily promote the use of standard Salesforce functionality. A Requirements Traceability Matrix is a document that links requirements to their sources and test cases, but does not necessarily increase the use of standard Salesforce functionality. A Project Management Office is a group that oversees the execution of projects, but does not necessarily increase the use of standard Salesforce functionality.

 DOM changes introduced by a release can cause automated browser tests to need updating, as they can affect the way the browser interacts with the web page elements and the selectors used to identify them. New standard fields, metadata schema changes, and new Apex methods are not likely to affect automated browser tests, as they are mostly related to the backend functionality and data model of Salesforce. See [Automated Browser Testing] for more details.