Skip to main content

Follow-up : Evaluating Application Architecture, Quantitatively





Since the publication of my article “Evaluating Application Architecture, Quantitatively” in the 23rd issue of Microsoft’s The Architecture Journal , Iam receiving lots of questions / encouraging comments / wishes / suggestions. I never expected such a response back from the architects’ community around the world and result is this follow-up.

In the article ‘Evaluating Application Architecture, Quantitatively’ which is outlining the framework for evaluating application architectures quantitatively, it is been specified that for a positive response to every question / statement in the questionnaire / checklist '1' will be assigned and '0' will be assigned for a negative response. When a set of questions / checklist is used for an application architecture evaluation, some of them may not be suitable for a particular context.

Say for example, you are evaluating an application’s architecture that is meant for intranet only. So, in that context, assume that you are doing an architecture evaluation based on a particular repository of questions and it has a question which goes like this:

“Are web servers are placed in the DMZ zone?”

In this given context, this question is not applicable. For an intranet application, it is not a must to place the web servers in a DMZ zone. So, here if the response is “No” then zero is to be assigned against that question. But here the question itself is invalid or “Not applicable (NA)”. If the repository has more such “NA” questions, then resulting “Architecture Index” will be misguiding.

Although more no. of a questions make your repository rich and increase the chance of doing architecture evaluation for wider variety of applications, because of the nature of some of the contexts, some questions may become “invalid” or “Not Applicable”.

So, when you are building a tool, you should always have a provision to allow the reviewing architect to make a question as “Not Applicable” so that particular question will be excluded from the Architecture Index calculation.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Lambda Architecture on Microsoft Azure

Gone are those days when Enterprises will wait for hours and days to look at the dashboards based on the old, stale data. In this fast world of BYOD, fitness gears and flooding of other devices, it is becoming super important  to derive out “actionable” information from huge volume of data / noise that is generated from these devices or any other data sources and act proactively on them  in real-time, to stay competitive.

At the same time, the need for having dashboards and other analytical capabilities based on the quality, cleansed, processed data still very much exists.

With the emergence of more data types and need to handle huge volume, shift is happening from the conventional data warehouse practice to cloud based data processing & management capabilities where high volume batch processing is possible at the optimized cost. Business scenarios demanding the need to process the data in real-time   More

SharePoint 2013 Architectural Trade-Offs

When planning for deploying SharePoint 2013 based Enterprise workloads, it should be done with the consideration / awareness of impact of various architectural decisions what we make. As SharePoint 2013 is a flexible platform providing lots of options in terms of configuration of the existing OOB features and development of custom development solutions to address specific business functional needs, care should be taken when making a particular decision and its impact on overall solution. Even though SharePoint is a matured product, the effectiveness of various business capabilities such as Enterprise Social, Enterprise Search, BI, Document Management, Web Content Management, and Enterprise Content Management that will be delivered based on it, in terms of addressing the business requirements depends on architecture planning. Effectiveness here means performance, security, up-time and other architectural qualities like Scalability, Reliability etc. more ...

Flexibility through product customization - How Secured it is ?

When providing solutions based on the multiple products, the success of the solution depends on what level of OOB features of those products helps in addressing the business / functional needs and what level of flexibility those products offers in terms of customization.

Also, how those products help in addressing business needs is very important in terms of time-to-market through:
Capabilities for seamless integration with federated business partners through adapters (like what Microsoft BizTalk, & StreamInsighthave rich set of adapters minimizing the development time), Partner ecosystem with solutions(like what partners have solutions basedon SharePoint in addressing various business requirements such as document storage, DRM / IRM, BI etc)
In addition to above mentioned factors, success depends on how the products allow developer community in extending its capabilities to address complex techno-business requirements.
While allowing the developer community for customization, it is a…