Question1Replies370Views HansBernving Member since 2016 9 posts SmartRules Posted: 3 years agoLast activity: 3 years ago Closed Locking ArchitectureIn the material the follwing qutestion is asked: Which of the following options does not describe a condition you would ensure before allowing a lock to be requested on a work object? (Choose One)The object already existed in the DatabaseThe object should be associated with a class groupThe lock cache across all JVMs has been synchronizedThe class group associated with the object must be defined to allow locking The correct answer seams to be 4. Why would I ensure that the cache in JVM would have been synchronised or that the object is associated with a class group? That is what pega does for you I would say Pega Academy ×Close popoverFacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail Copy Link Copied! Moderation Team has archived post This thread is closed to future replies. Content and links will no longer be updated. If you have the same/similar Question, please write a new Question. Posted: 3 years agopedel PEGA replied to HansBernving(1) is correct since an object cannot be locked until it is persisted in the database. Until persisted, a case is nothing more than uncommitted data that resides in browser or clipboard memory. (2) is correct since work objects (cases) should always be associated to a class group. (4) Is correct since in order to tell Pega to lock an object that is associated to a class group, the "Allow Locking" checkbox must be checked within the Class Group record. Answer (3) is the only option that is not correct. The word "cache" is not even mentioned in the Locking Architecture lesson much less how someone can ensure that a lock cache is synchronized. This particular quiz question in the 7.1 LSA course appears to be misconfigured.