Please don’t learn software architecture off the internet 

The internet isn’t the best place to learn software architecture. While you can quickly read about dozens of novel ways to structure software applications the internet tends to pull people towards poor solutions. 

Software architectures are ways of structuring software to support various demands. 

– development speed

– hardware platform (web, mobile, point of sale, drone, etc)

– team structure 

– ability to scale aggressively (If we get a big customer can we scale 100x quickly)

– correctness       (How often do we produce an incorrect result)

– recoverability    (how quickly can we recover from failures)

– supporting a particular load range (100-300 request/second)

– software engineering team competency

The problem is that the internet talks about interesting architectures preferentially over appropriate architectures. If you learn about architectures on the internet you will hear primarily about solutions developed for global scale corporations. These corporations typically employ the highest paid, most experienced engineers on the market and have large operating margins to work with. 

These ‘cool’ architectures typically support billions of operations per day and involve the efforts of 100s to 10,000s of engineers. Then the architect for a team of 20 engineers reads a blog post and decides we need ‘microservices’ or we need ‘event driven’. This sounds reasonable in a meeting. We ‘need to be able to scale if we get a big client’ sounds true. But it’s not. 

People do not understand software scaling. To humans ‘one million records a day’ sounds like a lot. To computers that is only 11.5 records per second, something a single virtual machine running python can handle easily. 

One million 10KB records per day is a problem you buy one hard drive per year to solve. 

If you primarily learn about software architecture online your focus is driven towards optimal hyper scale solutions for hyper competent teams. Your team is not likely to be hyper scale or hyper competent. The ‘software best practice’ for normal teams is not the same as for google. Finding the appropriate software architecture for your company probably requires logging off and talking to experienced ‘enterprise’ engineers. 

Links Post

Real time analytics article

https://adamsinger.substack.com/p/demystifying-real-time-analytics?utm_source=url&s=r

Danluu on the issues with purchasing solutions.

https://danluu.com/nothing-works/

Nuclear Stuff 

https://austinvernon.site/blog/nuclear.html

https://whatisnuclear.com/economics.html

Are we really engineers?

https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/are-we-really-engineers/

SledgeConf July 15th 2022

4:30PM Pacific Time

https://sledgeconf.dev

Hey, I’m bringing back Sledgeconf on July 15th. We have two talks this time ‘Planning your Cloud Migration’ and ‘Practical Software Estimation’. 

“Planning your Cloud Migration”

Jay Manning joins us again to talk about planning and executing Cloud Migrations. Jay has extensive experience with AWS partners working through their Cloud journey. 

“Practical Software Estimation” 

I will be speaking on my research and interviews on the subject of practical software estimation. How do we estimate software today and what are the best practices?

Make sure to join the mailing list to get the invite link and blog updates! See you all in July!

https://sledgeconf.dev

What is your design budget

We all want to have good longterm software architecture. Build it right the first time. But some organizations fall into the trap of trying to get a perfect design before they start building.

They include more stakeholders, try to plan for contingencies, develop a high availability strategy. 

Those things are all good to have. But you don’t need them before you have users. If you have no users you shouldn’t be thinking about high availability. If your product doesn’t work yet you don’t need scalability.

Users > working product > scaling limitations > high availability

Another problem is having a committee to approve architecture proposals. One or two people is fine. But having three or more people who can block the start of the project is a recipe for pointless delays.

The reason we switched to agile methodologies is because it’s hard to know what the difficulties will be before you start building the software.

Be careful to structure your organization such that design doesn’t become more important than delivery.

A working product with customers is always more valuable than a product that doesn’t have customers but is highly available.

A design budget is a way to avoid falling into this trap. Simply budget a week or a month or whatever for designing up front. At the end of that time enforce a hard stop on doing more design. No more committee reviews or deliberation. If the architecture isn’t developed enough to start building, do a spike on a smaller scale.