Engineer in the White Spaces
A system consists of interdependent programs. We call the arrangement of these programs and their relationships "architecture". When we diagram these systems, we often represent individual programs or servers as simplistic little rectangles, connected by arrows.
One little arrow might mean, "Synchronous request/reply using SOAP-XML over HTTP." That's quite a lot of information for one little glyph to carry. There's not usually enough room to write all that, so we label the unfortunate arrow with either "XML over HTTP"---if viewing it from an internal perspective---or "SKU Lookup"---if we have an external perspective.
That brave little arrow crossing the gap between programs looks like a direct contact, but it isn't. The space between the boxes isn't empty at all. It's filled with hardware and software components. In between boxes, you'll find some or all of the following:
* Network interface cards * Network switches * Layer 2 - 3 firewalls * Layer 7 (application) firewalls * Intrusion Detection and Prevention Systems * Message queues * Message brokers * XML transformation engines * Flat file translations * FTP servers * Polling jobs * Database "landing zone" tables * ETL scripts * Metro-area SoNET rings * MPLS gateways * Trunk lines * Oceans * Ocean liners * Phillipine fishing trawlers (see, "Underwater Cable Break")
Even in the simple cases, there will be four or five computers between program A and B, each running their own programs to handle things like packet switching, traffic analysis, routing, threat analysis, and so on. As the architect bridging between those programs, you must consider this substrate.
I've seen a single arrow, running from one server to another, labelled "Fulfillment". It so happened that one server was inside my client's company while the other server was in a fulfillment house's company. That little arrow, so critical to customer satisfaction, really represented a Byzantine chain of events that resembled a game of "Mousetrap" more than a single interface. It had messages going to message brokers that appended lines to files, which were later picked up by an hourly job that would FTP the files to the "gateway" server (still inside my client's company.) The gateway server read each line from the file and constructed and XML message, which it then sent via HTTP to the fulfillment house.
It's essential to understand that static and dynamic loads that arrow must carry. Instead of just "SOAP-XML over HTTP", that one little arrow should also say, "Expect one query per HTTP request and send back one response per HTTP reply. Expect up to 100 requests per second, and deliver responses in less than 250 milliseconds 99.999% of the time."
Building the right failure modes is also vital. The last job of any structure is to fall down well. The same is true for our hardy little arrow. The interface needs to define what happens on each end when things come unglued. What if the caller sends more than 100 requests per second? Is it OK to refuse them? Should the receiver drop requests on the floor, refuse politely, or make the best effort possible?
What should the caller do when replies take more than 250 milliseconds? Should it retry the call? Should it wait until later, or assume the receiver has failed and move on without that function?
What happens when the caller sends a request with version 1.0 of the protocol and gets back a reply in version 1.1? What if it gets back some HTML instead of XML? Or an MP3 file instead of XML?
When a bridge falls down, it is shocking, horrifying, and often fatal. Computers and networks, on the other hand, fall down all the time. They always will. Therefore, it's incumbent on us to ensure that individual computers and networks fail in predictable ways. We need to know what happens to that arrow when one end disappears for a while.
Decide what kind of load that arrow must support. Figure out what to do when the demand is more than it can bear. Decide what happens when the substrate beneath it falls apart, or when the duplicitous rectangle on the other end goes bonkers.
This is the essence of engineering the white spaces.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3
Back to 97 Things Every Software Architect Should Know home page