To improve the dashboard performance, the data architect should use selective queries to reduce the amount of data being returned, de-normalize the data by reducing the number of joins, and reduce the amount of data queried by archiving unused opportunity records. These options will help optimize the query performance, reduce the query complexity, and free up storage space. Option C is incorrect because removing widgets from the dashboard to reduce the number of graphics loaded will not affect the dashboard performance significantly, and may reduce the usability and functionality of the dashboard. Option D is incorrect because running the dashboard for CEO and sending it via email will not improve the dashboard performance, but rather shift the burden to another user.

 According to the  How to avoid row lock or race condition in Apex  blog post, one of the ways to prevent race condition in Apex is to use the FOR UPDATE keyword in SOQL statements. The blog post states that “We need to lock the records on which we are working such that other batches or threads will not be having any effect on them. How can we lock a record, then? We need to make use of FOR UPDATE keyword in the SOQL query.” Therefore, a data architect should recommend this solution to guarantee that records are not being updated at the same time by different processes.

According to the official Salesforce guide 1 , data classification metadata is a feature that allows administrators to classify data fields based on their sensitivity level, such as confidential, restricted, or general. Data classification metadata can be used to filter and identify sensitive data fields and apply appropriate security measures, such as encryption, masking, or auditing. Option D is the correct answer because it suggests using data classification metadata to provide ways to filter and identify sensitive data. Option A is incorrect because data grouping metadata is not a feature in Salesforce. Option B is incorrect because field-level security is a feature that controls the visibility and editability of fields based on user profiles or permission sets, but it does not provide ways to filter and identify sensitive data. Option C is incorrect because creating a custom checkbox denoting sensitive data is not a scalable or reliable solution, as it requires manual maintenance and does not enforce any security measures.

Leveraging Heroku Connect and Heroku Postgres, middleware tools, or Salesforce Connect and the cross-org adapter are all viable options to share data between Org A and Org B in near-real time 3 . Installing a 3rd party AppExchange tool may not provide bidirectional sync or may have additional costs. Developing an Apex class that pushes opportunity data between orgs daily via the Apex schedule may not meet the near-real time requirement.

 Specify the legacy CRM as the system of record during transition until it is removed from operation and fully replaced by Salesforce. This is a good technique to ensure data consistency and avoid conflicts between the two systems. Work with stakeholders to establish a Master Data Management plan for the system of record for specific objects, records, and fields.  This is another good technique to define the data governance and stewardship policies and processes for managing data quality and integrity across multiple systems

The three key steps that a data architect should take when merging data from multiple systems into Salesforce are:

Analyze each system’s data model and perform gap analysis. This step involves understanding the structure and meaning of the data in each system, identifying the common and unique data elements, and mapping the data fields between the systems. This step also involves assessing the quality and consistency of the data, and identifying any data cleansing or transformation needs.

Utilize an ETL tool to merge, transform, and de-duplicate data. This step involves using an ETL tool to connect to the source systems, extract the data, apply any data transformations or validations, and load the data into Salesforce. This step also involves applying de-duplication rules or algorithms to avoid creating duplicate records in Salesforce.

Work with stakeholders to define record and field survivorship rules. This step involves collaborating with the business users and owners of the data to determine which records and fields should be retained or overwritten in case of conflicts or discrepancies. This step also involves defining the criteria and logic for record and field survivorship, and implementing them in the ETL tool or in Salesforce.

Creating new fields to store additional values from all the systems is not a key step, but rather a possible outcome of the gap analysis. It may not be necessary or desirable to create new fields for every value from every system, as it may result in redundant or irrelevant data. Installing a 3rd party AppExchange tool to handle the merger is not a key step, but rather a possible option for choosing an ETL tool. It may not be the best option depending on the requirements, budget, and preferences of the organization.

Implicit sharing will automatically handle this sharing requirement with standard functionality, as it grants read-only access to parent accounts when users have access to child opportunities.  This is also known as account-opportunity sharing 3 . Creating a criteria-based sharing rule (option A) or an owner-based sharing rule (option D) is not necessary, as they are used to grant additional access based on record criteria or ownership. Adding appropriate users to the account team (option C) is also not required, as it is used to grant access to specific users or groups for individual accounts.

Changing Opportunity Amount field access to Read Only for sales users field-level security (option C) is the best way to address the overwriting issue, as it prevents sales users from updating the field that is controlled by PPS, and ensures data consistency and accuracy. Creating a custom field for Opportunity amount that PSS updates separating the field sales user updates (option A) or creating a custom field for Opportunity amount that sales users update separating the field that PPS updates (option D) are not good solutions, as they may create confusion and inconsistency with the Opportunity Forecast feature. Changing PSS integration to update only Opportunity Amount field when the value is null (option B) is also not a good solution, as it may cause data loss or conflicts with the sales users’ inputs.

 Integrate SAP with Salesforce, SAP to legacy CRM but not legacy CRM to Salesforce. This is a good recommendation because it allows both Salesforce and the legacy CRM to interact with the ERP system, which can be the source of truth for some data entities. However, it avoids creating a direct connection between Salesforce and the legacy CRM, which can cause data duplication and synchronization issues. Suggest MDM solution and link MDM to salesforce and SAP.  This is another good recommendation because it can help manage the data lifecycle and quality across multiple systems, as well as provide a single view of the customer data

A required Lookup relationship ensures that the Shipment record must have a value for each of the three parent records, and also prevents the deletion of those parent records if they are referenced by a Shipment record.  A Master-Detail relationship would not allow separate sharing models for each custom object, and a VLOOKUP formula field would not enforce the relationship or prevent deletion