Q: 6
A Data Cloud consultant recently discovered that their identity resolution process is matching
individuals that share email addresses or phone numbers, but are not actually the same individual.
What should the consultant do to address this issue?
Options
Discussion
C . Modifying the current ruleset like D is risky for live data, saw similar advice in practice questions.
C vs D here. I remember in the official guide it says to make a new ruleset when tightening matching logic so you don't risk messing up current production data. That way you compare results safely before going live. Still, some folks might pick D for speed, so not 100 percent sure. Anyone see a practice test with this exact detail?
Its C for this one
C tbh
C tbh. You always want to build a new ruleset so you can test without risking current production data. Changing the active one (like D) is risky if something goes wrong. Pretty standard Salesforce practice, but let me know if I missed something obvious.
C is what you want here. You shouldn't change the production ruleset until you've built and compared a new, stricter one-much safer to avoid messing up live profiles. D sounds similar but is a trap, since modifying the live config introduces risk before you've validated anything. Pretty sure on this from both best practice and what I've seen in some practice tests.
C or D. Not fully sure since both involve stricter rules, but C feels safer since you don't mess with the active ruleset while testing. Open to better logic here.
A I think you just tighten up the criteria in the current ruleset and keep tuning until results look right.
Likely D makes sense here since modifying the existing ruleset feels faster and you can still compare results. Maybe I'm missing something about the safer approach, but D seems like it could work in some real projects. Agree?
C
Be respectful. No spam.
