Microsoft Power BI Data Analyst PL-300 Practice Test 13
Question 120
A report stores one row per sales line but the analyst created a related Customer table with three rows per CustomerID; totals increase unexpectedly. After the correct solution is implemented, which result provides the MOST DIRECT evidence that the requirement actually works?
- One aggregate value is nonblank, but filtering has not been tested from each intended dimension
- The model saves successfully, but source keys and report totals have not been reconciled
- The relationship diagram displays a line between tables, but no matching-key uniqueness test has run
- Sales totals reconcile and Customer has one row per CustomerID at the declared grain
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Sales totals reconcile and Customer has one row per CustomerID at the declared grain This exercises the requested business outcome and the necessary positive or negative boundary.
Incorrect Answers
A:An unfiltered total cannot establish that the model's date roles and cross-filter paths behave as specified.
B:Saving a model does not rule out duplicate dimension rows, ambiguous paths or fact multiplication.
C:A visible relationship is not proof that the dimension key and relationship cardinality are valid.
Question 121
A semantic model imported many unused high-cardinality transaction text columns and file size is excessive. After the correct solution is implemented, which result provides the MOST DIRECT evidence that the requirement actually works?
- The edited query saves, but the expected folding or model-size effect has not been measured
- The model size decreases without breaking the documented visuals or dimensions
- A developer reports the model feels faster, but no before-and-after query trace was collected
- One visual renders faster, but the result totals have not been compared for correctness
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:The model size decreases without breaking the documented visuals or dimensions This exercises the requested business outcome and the necessary positive or negative boundary.
Incorrect Answers
A:Saving changes does not prove predicate pushdown or storage reduction occurred.
C:Perceived speed without measurements cannot establish the claimed optimization.
D:An invalidly simplified calculation can be fast while returning wrong results.
Question 122
A Category dimension contains duplicate CategoryKey values due to source errors, and Power BI refuses to create the intended one-to-many relationship to Sales. A pilot instead implemented the following proposed change: Make CategoryKey unique by deleting repeated sales transaction lines. The business requirement was not met. Which technical limitation MOST DIRECTLY explains the result?
- A many-to-many relationship hides a bad dimension grain and can distort aggregations
- Filter direction does not make duplicate one-side keys unique
- Fact records are allowed to share a dimension foreign key and should not be deleted
- The one side of a relationship requires unique key values and a failed refresh can follow duplicates
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Fact records are allowed to share a dimension foreign key and should not be deleted This specifically addresses the deployed or proposed alternative: Make CategoryKey unique by deleting repeated sales transaction lines.
Incorrect Answers
A:A many-to-many relationship hides a bad dimension grain and can distort aggregations That limitation applies to a different alternative (Change cardinality to many-to-many and ignore the defective category data), not the one here.
B:Filter direction does not make duplicate one-side keys unique That limitation describes Use bidirectional filtering to resolve duplicate dimension keys, not the specified approach.
D:The one side of a relationship requires unique key values and a failed refresh can follow duplicates This supports the recommended design but does not diagnose why the specified alternative fails.
Question 123
An executive time intelligence report needs consistent full-year month comparisons across multiple fact tables, including months with no transactions. Which Power BI or Power Query action BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Create a contiguous shared calendar Date table and mark it as the Date table where required
- Use a Year text column without a true date field
- Create a different partial date list for each fact table
- Use Sales transaction dates alone as the calendar
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:A complete calendar provides consistent date granularity and supports time-intelligence semantics This addresses the specific requirement: an executive time intelligence report needs consistent full-year month comparisons across multiple fact tables, including months with no transactions.
Incorrect Answers
B:Text years cannot independently provide daily date semantics for time intelligence This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
C:Different incomplete calendars can cause inconsistent period comparisons across facts This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
D:A fact date list can omit no-sales dates and cannot guarantee a contiguous calendar This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
Question 124
Several measures need the same currency-selection logic and maintenance across report pages, while minimizing duplicated measure definitions. After the correct solution is implemented, which result provides the MOST DIRECT evidence that the requirement actually works?
- The measure changes after a slicer click, but the result has not been compared against known test rows
- The field uses the expected numeric format, but no zero-denominator or date-boundary case was tested
- The DAX expression parses and returns a number for one unfiltered report page
- Applying the calculation item changes eligible measures consistently without rewriting every base measure
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Applying the calculation item changes eligible measures consistently without rewriting every base measure This exercises the requested business outcome and the necessary positive or negative boundary.
Incorrect Answers
A:Reacting to a slicer does not establish the correct math or intended filter semantics.
B:Formatting and a normal case do not validate the edge condition the calculation is supposed to handle.
C:A valid DAX expression may still evaluate the wrong period, denominator or context under filters.
Question 125
Finance needs Gross Margin Percent and some filtered regions have zero revenue, so division errors must be handled intentionally. A design reviewer proposes this alternative: Use SUM([Gross Margin]) divided by row count. Which objection BEST explains why it would not satisfy the stated requirement?
- Inventing revenue changes the underlying financial data to mask a calculation edge case
- Unprotected division can produce undesirable special results in zero-revenue contexts
- DIVIDE safely handles a zero denominator and can return a deliberate alternate result
- An already evaluated measure is not a column to sum and row count is the wrong denominator
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:An already evaluated measure is not a column to sum and row count is the wrong denominator This specifically addresses the deployed or proposed alternative: Use SUM([Gross Margin]) divided by row count.
Incorrect Answers
A:Inventing revenue changes the underlying financial data to mask a calculation edge case That limitation describes Replace missing revenue with a fixed 1 in the source, not the specified approach.
B:Unprotected division can produce undesirable special results in zero-revenue contexts That limitation applies to a different alternative (Use the raw slash operator with no zero-denominator policy), not the one here.
C:DIVIDE safely handles a zero denominator and can return a deliberate alternate result This supports the recommended design but does not diagnose why the specified alternative fails.
Question 126
Sales has an active order-date relationship and an inactive ShipDate relationship to Date, and a measure must compute shipped revenue for the date slicer. A pilot instead implemented the following proposed change: Use the original [Total Revenue] measure without modifiers. The business requirement was not met. Which technical limitation MOST DIRECTLY explains the result?
- The active order-date relationship would continue controlling the slicer
- Unqualified competing active paths can be ambiguous and do not isolate a shipped-sales measure
- Duplicating the date does not switch filter propagation to the shipping relationship
- USERELATIONSHIP activates the specified inactive relationship for the measure evaluation
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:The active order-date relationship would continue controlling the slicer This specifically addresses the deployed or proposed alternative: Use the original [Total Revenue] measure without modifiers.
Incorrect Answers
B:Unqualified competing active paths can be ambiguous and do not isolate a shipped-sales measure That limitation applies to a different alternative (Activate both date relationships at once as an unqualified permanent model change), not the one here.
C:Duplicating the date does not switch filter propagation to the shipping relationship That limitation describes Add a calculated column containing Date[Date] on each fact row without using ShipDate, not the specified approach.
D:USERELATIONSHIP activates the specified inactive relationship for the measure evaluation This supports the recommended design but does not diagnose why the specified alternative fails.
Question 127
Several measures need the same currency-selection logic and maintenance across report pages, while minimizing duplicated measure definitions. Which Power BI or Power Query action BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Copy the same DAX into each of dozens of measures
- Create a calculation group with calculation items for the supported currency transformations
- Use a Power Query Merge unrelated to the selected-measure logic
- Store the conversion in a static report title
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:A calculation group can centralize reusable DAX expression transformations over selected measures This addresses the specific requirement: several measures need the same currency-selection logic and maintenance across report pages, while minimizing duplicated measure definitions.
Incorrect Answers
A:Duplicating formulas increases maintenance and inconsistency risks This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
C:Source query merging does not centralize calculation-item behavior across measures This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
D:Titles do not transform underlying measure values This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
Question 128
Finance needs Gross Margin Percent and some filtered regions have zero revenue, so division errors must be handled intentionally. After the correct solution is implemented, which result provides the MOST DIRECT evidence that the requirement actually works?
- The DAX expression parses and returns a number for one unfiltered report page
- The field uses the expected numeric format, but no zero-denominator or date-boundary case was tested
- The measure changes after a slicer click, but the result has not been compared against known test rows
- Zero-revenue regions show the chosen blank state and normal regions show correct margin-to-revenue ratios
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Zero-revenue regions show the chosen blank state and normal regions show correct margin-to-revenue ratios This exercises the requested business outcome and the necessary positive or negative boundary.
Incorrect Answers
A:A valid DAX expression may still evaluate the wrong period, denominator or context under filters.
B:Formatting and a normal case do not validate the edge condition the calculation is supposed to handle.
C:Reacting to a slicer does not establish the correct math or intended filter semantics.
Question 129
A report needs to count unique customers making purchases even if a customer places multiple orders. A pilot instead implemented the following proposed change: Use COUNTROWS(Sales) as the customer count. The business requirement was not met. Which technical limitation MOST DIRECTLY explains the result?
- An identifier should not be summed to represent the number of customers
- Removing filters produces an unfiltered transaction count, not distinct customers
- Distinct customer counting prevents repeat orders from inflating the customer total
- A row per transaction can count one customer multiple times
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:A row per transaction can count one customer multiple times This specifically addresses the deployed or proposed alternative: Use COUNTROWS(Sales) as the customer count.
Incorrect Answers
A:An identifier should not be summed to represent the number of customers That limitation applies to a different alternative (Use SUM(Sales[CustomerID])), not the one here.
B:Removing filters produces an unfiltered transaction count, not distinct customers That limitation describes Use COUNTROWS(ALL(Sales)), not the specified approach.
C:Distinct customer counting prevents repeat orders from inflating the customer total This supports the recommended design but does not diagnose why the specified alternative fails.
Question 130
A Power BI report takes nine seconds to render and the team must find whether a specific visual or DAX query dominates the delay. Which Power BI or Power Query action BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Increase the font size of all cards and assume performance improves
- Disable all page slicers without timing each visual
- Publish the same report to another workspace without inspecting query timings
- Run Performance Analyzer and inspect visual duration and the captured DAX query
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Performance Analyzer identifies expensive visual operations and supports targeted optimization This addresses the specific requirement: a Power BI report takes nine seconds to render and the team must find whether a specific visual or DAX query dominates the delay.
Incorrect Answers
A:Visual typography does not identify the slow query This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
B:Removing functionality before measurement can hide the real bottleneck This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.
C:Workspace location alone does not diagnose the expensive visual This alternative therefore fails an explicit scenario constraint.