Microsoft MB-820 PDF Exam Questions:

In Business Central, fields in tables are assigned specific data types that determine the kind of data they can store. For the Non-conformity table mentioned in the case study, the following data types should be used:

Date for the Non-Conformity Date field: This is because the Non-conformity Date field is required to store only the date when the non-conformity was recorded. The Date data type is appropriate for storing dates without times.

Code for the Non-Conformity Number field: The Non-conformity Number field is described to use alphanumeric values with a format that includes 'NC' and the year, like 'NC24-001'. In Business Central, the Code data type is used for fields that store alphanumeric keys. It is a text field with a limited length, which makes it suitable for number series that contain letters and numbers.

Other options are not suitable:

A) Integer for the Non-conformity Number field: This would not be appropriate because the Non-conformity Number includes alphanumeric characters and not just integers.

B) DateTime for the Non-Conformity Date field: This is not correct because there is no requirement to store the time alongside the date.

C) Char for the Non-Conformity Number field: Char data type is not typically used in Business Central for number series or identifiers. The Code data type is preferred for this purpose.

The task is to identify unwanted incoming web service calls during the last seven days. To do this, we need to look at KQL (Kusto Query Language) queries that would filter out web service calls based on the timestamp (to ensure the calls are within the last seven days) and by certain characteristics that would indicate they are unwanted, such as the wrong type of protocol (SOAP in this case, as Contoso Ltd. plans to dismiss using it).

Looking at the options:

Option A: This query selects all traces where the timestamp is within the last 7 days and where the custom dimension has a value of 'RT0008', and where the category is either 'ODataV4', 'ODataV3', or 'Api'. This query would show all API calls except SOAP, so it does not directly answer the question about unwanted calls.

Option B: This query filters for traces with a timestamp within the last 7 days, where 'RT0008' is present, and specifically looks for the category 'SOAP'. This query is correct because it directly targets SOAP calls, which are the unwanted calls according to Contoso Ltd.'s plans.

Option C: Similar to option B, this query filters for traces within the last 7 days and looks for 'RT0008' but uses the equality operator for the category 'SOAP'. This would also correctly return the unwanted SOAP calls.

Option D: This query also filters for traces within the last 7 days, but it excludes the 'ODataV4' category, which doesn't necessarily target the unwanted SOAP calls.

Option E: This query selects traces where the timestamp is within the last 7 days and the custom dimension has 'RT0008'. However, it filters out categories 'ODataV4' and 'Api', which does not directly help in identifying the unwanted SOAP calls.

Therefore, the queries that should be used to determine if there are unwanted incoming web service calls (SOAP calls) in the tenant during the last seven days are Options B and C. These queries are specific to identifying SOAP protocol usage, which is what Contoso Ltd. considers unwanted.

In the context provided by the case study, when calling an API action from a mobile application, the correct format for a POST request to an action in Business Central typically involves specifying the entity (/issues), the ID of the entity (88122e0e-5796-ec11-bb87-000d3a392eb5), and the action to be called (/Copy). The action name should match the exact name as defined in the AL code, which is case-sensitive.

Option A is incorrect because it uses a non-standard format for the action call.

Option B uses the PATCH method, which is generally used for update operations, not for calling actions.

Option C is correct as it uses the POST method, which is appropriate for calling actions, and correctly specifies the entity, ID, and action name.

Option D is incorrect because the action name /copy is in lowercase, while AL is case-sensitive, and it should match the case exactly as defined in the code.

Option E incorrectly adds 'MicrosoftNAV' before the action name, which is not standard for calling actions in Business Central APIs.

Hence, the correct action to use when calling the Issue API action from the mobile application is given in Option C.

In the context of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, an extension may not appear in the tenant for several reasons, particularly after an upgrade to a new major version.

Option A suggests that the extension was published as a DEV extension, which typically would not cause it to disappear after an upgrade because DEV extensions are intended for development and testing within sandbox environments.

Option B indicates that the extension was not compatible with the new version within 60 days of the first notification. This is a likely reason because Microsoft enforces compatibility rules, and extensions that are not made compatible within the specified timeframe might be removed or disabled.

Option C refers to the extension being published as a PTE (Per-Tenant Extension) and mentions the Platform parameter not being updated. This could cause issues, but not specifically the disappearance of the extension after an upgrade.

Option D expands on Option C by adding that both the Platform and Runtime parameters were not updated in the application file. This is a critical aspect because if these parameters are not correctly set to indicate compatibility with the new version of Business Central, the extension could be disabled or removed.

Option E is similar to Option B but mentions a 90-day period. This option does not align with standard Business Central practices for version compatibility requirements.

Therefore, the two possible reasons for the disappearance of the extension in the tenant after an upgrade are that the extension was not compatible with the new version within the required timeframe (Option B) and that the extension was published as a PTE without the Platform and Runtime parameters being updated (Option D).

In Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, when configuring snapshot debugging, it is crucial that the parameters in the configuration file are correctly set. From the options provided, the issue with the debugger not starting correctly is most likely due to an incorrect 'userId' parameter.

Option A is the cause of the problem. The 'userId' parameter must be the GUID of the user, not the username. The snapshot debugger needs the exact GUID to attach to the right session for debugging.

Option B is incorrect because 'breakOnNext' set to 'WebClient' is a valid setting. This tells the debugger to break on the next client action in the web client, which is a typical scenario.

Option C is not the cause of the problem. The 'userId' parameter is meant to specify which user session to debug, and this works in conjunction with the 'breakOnNext' parameter.

Option D is incorrect as the 'executionContext' parameter does not need to be set to 'Debug' for snapshot debugging to work. 'DebugAndProfile' is a valid value for the 'executionContext' parameter, as it allows for debugging and collecting performance information.

Therefore, the reason why the debugger does not start correctly is due to Option A: The 'userId' parameter must have the GUID of the user specified, not the username.