Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
69 lines (46 loc) · 5.25 KB

ArchitecturePattern.md

File metadata and controls

69 lines (46 loc) · 5.25 KB
Raw

> Home > Solution Background < Prev | Next >

Overall Architecture Style Analysis

Identified Key Architectural Characteristics

The key architectural characteristics that were identified help us to select and overall architecture style.
Our 3 most important characteristics are shown in bold.

  • Performance (2)
  • Scalability
  • Availability (1)
  • Security
  • Workflow
  • Agility (3)
  • Interoperability

Architecture Capabilities Comparison

Based on our identified characteristics

architectural-styles [original comparison matrix from DeveloperToArchitect.com]

Architecture Capabilities Analysis

The above matrix gives us three candidates for our architecture, which we can consider further:

Microservices

Pros Cons
Scores highly on elasticity and scalability, very important for analytics computation and media access. Scores low on performance and workflow, which would be a big trade-off with performance being one of the top 3 characteristics.
Scores highly on fault-tolerance, important to make sure MonitorMe is not disrupted by a fault in one area. Scores low on costs and simplicity. Not one of our main concerns, but as we've a on-premise setup this should be considered as well.
Requires that the database be split along with each microservice. This would be very complex and another big trade-off.
Scores low on workflow, which would be a trade-off with workflow being important for onboarding of customers.

Event-Driven

Pros Cons
Scores highly on elasticity and scalability, very important for analytics computation and media access. Interoperability and configurability score fairly low, which is a concern with them being two of the top three characteristics.
Scores highly on fault-tolerance, important to make sure MonitorMe is not disrupted by a fault in one area. Not one of our main concerns, but as we've a on-premise setup this should be considered as well.
Workflow scores highly, important for sending almost real-time notifications.

Service-Based

Pros Cons
Scores highly on agility, very important for adapting to changing industry and learnings Scores low on workflow, which would be a trade-off with workflow being important for onboarding of customers.
Scores highly on fault-tolerance, important to make sure MonitorMe is not disrupted by a fault in one area. Scores fairly low on performance and low on workflow, which would be a big trade-off with performance being one of the top 3 characteristics.

Conclusion

All three architecture options have trade-offs and none fits our requirements perfectly.
In the end the benefit of having a combination of Event-Driven and Service-Based architecture fits our requirements best.

Decision

ADR: 07 Architecture Decision

> Home > Solution < Prev | Next >