Free Salesforce Plat-Dev-210 Actual Exam Questions s - Question 7 Discussion

It’s D. Using a formula with the Filter function offers more control over what gets returned, so you can specify exactly which single result you want. The Limit property or filters might just cut off results arbitrarily, but a formula lets you set conditions to pick one meaningful record. This way, you avoid accidentally grabbing the wrong one if multiple entries qualify.

Maybe B makes the most sense since it limits results right where the extract is defined, avoiding any extra steps later on. A depends on action settings which might not always apply.

B seems more precise since it caps results directly in the extract setup.

A imo, setting the Limit property on the action calling the Data Mapper Extract is the most direct and reliable way to restrict results to just one. It’s straightforward and doesn’t require messing with the extract definition or output types. Option B might work if the Extract supports a LIMIT filter, but that’s not always guaranteed or clean. C and D seem off since they don’t actually restrict output count, just shape or filter data. So, setting the Limit at the action level feels like the simplest and most consistently available approach.

I doubt the Filter function (D) can limit count, so B seems best.

A/B? Setting the Limit property on the action (A) seems straightforward if the Extract call supports it, but if not, then filtering at the Extract level (B) is cleaner. C feels indirect for just limiting results.

Honestly, I think B makes the most sense here. If the Extract definition supports a LIMIT filter, that’s the cleanest way to directly cap the number of results right at the source. Filtering after the fact or customizing output types seems more roundabout and might not guarantee just one result consistently. So I’d go with B on this one.

I’m thinking option C might be worth considering. Using a Custom Output Type could let you define exactly how many results to expect, effectively limiting the output without relying on filters or action properties. It’s a different approach from A or B that directly handles the data structure. Has anyone seen this used in practice for limiting output counts?

D imo, defining a formula with the Filter function lets you control the output more flexibly without relying on platform-specific features that might not be available. Options A and B depend on whether the platform supports those properties or filters, which isn’t clear here. Using a formula to filter down to one result feels like a safer, more universally applicable approach. Plus, Custom Output Type (C) won’t limit results, it just changes the structure, so that one’s out.

Maybe A makes sense too since setting the Limit property on the action directly controls output count without messing with the extract definition. It’s a straightforward way to cap results.

The best way isn’t D because the Filter function just narrows down data but doesn’t strictly limit the number of results. B seems solid since using a LIMIT filter on the Extract itself directly caps the output at one result, which fits the requirement perfectly. Setting the Limit property on the action (A) might not always apply at the data extraction level, while C changes output structure but doesn’t limit results count. So B makes most sense here.

It’s A because the Limit property directly controls how many results the action returns, which is exactly what’s needed here to restrict output to one result.

Maybe D could work here since defining a formula with the Filter function might limit the results by filtering down to just one entry. Setting a limit property or using a custom output type doesn’t sound like the right way to restrict the extract output itself. Defining logic directly in the extractor via filtering seems more precise than applying limits elsewhere.

It’s B for sure.