Real World Software Architecture

Real World Software Architecture is dedicated to providing information and experiences from the field of Software Architecture.



Subscribe with RSS or ATOM Add to Google

Links

  • Home Page
  • Real World Software Process Engineering
  • Suggested Reading
  • .NET Dev and Arch Collection
  • SEI Essays on SA
  • Software Architecture
  • Bredemeyer
  • wwisa
  • Product Line Engineering
  • PLEES
  • Software Product Lines
  • MSDN Architecture Center
  • patterns & practices






Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Applied Architecture Patterns on the Microsoft Platform Book Review

This is a book that would be good for anyone that wants to get a snapshot of the current Microsoft technology stack.

It gives decent primers on Window Communication Foundation (WCF) 4.0 and Windows Workflow (WF) 4.0, Windows Server AppFabric, BizTalk, SQL Server, and Windows Azure.

The primers are thorough enough to give you a decent understanding of each technology.

The book then covers common scenarios found in most enterprise level applications. The scenarios include, Simple Workflow, Content-based Routing, Publish-Subscribe, Repair/Resubmit with Human Workflow, Remote Message Broadcasting, Debatching Bulk Data, Complex Event Processing, Cross-Organizational Supply Chain, Multiple Master Synchronization, Rapid Flexible Scalability, Low-Latency Request-Reply, Handling Large Session and Reference Data, and Website Load Burst and Failover.

Each topic has a complete chapter dedicated to it.

The chapters start off by describing the requirements, presenting a pattern, and then they list several candidate architectures giving the good and bad aspects of each. They then pick the best one and implement a solution.

Most of the chapters were pretty good. The only one I found really lacking was the one on Multiple Master Synchronization. It included SSIS, Search Server Express, and Microsoft's Master Data Services as part of the solution. The details of the solutions were way to vague to give any real insight into how to implement the suggested architecture.

All in all I found this book a very interesting read. It gave some great insight into Microsoft's current technology stack. I definitely recommend grabbing a copy.

posted by tadanderson at 4:01 PM 0 comments

Sunday, January 23, 2011

MASTER DATA MANAGEMENT AND DATA GOVERNANCE, 2/E Book Review

This book is great for beginners just starting out with MDM as well as seasoned professionals. I was introduced to MDM with the first version of this book. That was not my copy, so I bought the second edition for myself.

This book covers everything MDM from architectural considerations to governance and market trends.

The book offers some really sound advice on building the business case for MDM and how to communicate that business case effectively. Listen to their advice!!!! I am an architect, purely a technical guy, but I can tell you from experience without the backing of the business your project will be squashed.

The book covers the technical aspects of implementation in great detail. This book will give you the insight you need to fully understand the complexities of an MDM project. There are a ton of vendors out their claiming to have a magic install of MDM available for purchase, but the truth is they just do not exist. MDM is a process with many steps involved, not a product.

All in all if you are involved or getting involved with MDM this is the book to read.

posted by tadanderson at 4:11 PM 0 comments

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Requirements Engineering: Fundamentals, Principles, and Techniques Book Review

It is not common to see a book like this come out in today’s technical book market, or for that matter in any era of the technical book market. Today most books are rushed to market, and publishers seem desperate for authors, because there is some real junk being published. But I am not comparing this book to the junk. I am comparing it to the classics like Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software, Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture, and Code Complete: A Practical Handbook of Software Construction, Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code .

This book is going to be a classic. It is the best book I have seen on Requirements Engineering, by far!!!! It is organized very well. The logical flow and organization of the book helps to make it a great read from front to back, as well as a great reference.

Some, I repeat "some", of what it covers includes System and Context Boundaries, Fundamentals of Goal Orientation, Documenting Goals, Fundamentals of Scenarios, Scenario Types, Documenting Scenarios, Solution-Oriented Requirements, Documenting Requirements in the Data Perspective, Documenting Requirements in the Functional Perspective, Documenting Requirements in the Behavioural Perspective, Documenting Quality Requirements in the Three Perspectives, Using UML2 and SysML, Natural Language Documentation, Structuring Natural Language Requirements, Fundamentals of Conceptual Modelling, Elicitation Techniques, Requirements Negotiation, Conflict Management, Requirements Validation, Requirements Management, Requirements Traceability, Prioritising Requirements, Change Management for Requirements, Co-development of Requirements and Architectural Artefacts, Requirements Engineering for Software Product Lines.

The topics are in depth and concise. No filler chatter to make the book bigger. The way it covers the topics is through the use of a visual framework which breaks the topics down into different topics and activities. The framework allows you to see how all the topics and activities are related.

The book contains a nice glossary, index and a well organized section on the references and other reading material.

The book is big, which is a welcome change from some of the small books being printed today. Some of the diagrams in the smaller books can hardly be read. That is not the case with this book.

This book does a wonderful job of making a very intense and difficult job understandable. If you have anything to do with software development this book is a must read.

If you buy just one book on software development in this decade, make this the book. You won't regret it.

posted by tadanderson at 6:38 AM 0 comments

Tuesday, January 04, 2011

Agile Development != Chaos

The most agile project teams I have seen are those that do not claim to be agile or lean. They have a solid well documented architecture in place as well as designs of the modules being built. They have separated the responsibilities amongst the team members according to the team member's skill set. They don't try to pretend everyone has the experience levels that would allow them to contribute to all aspects of the development process. Requirements, Architecture, Analysis and design, and Proof of Concepts take up 80% of the projects resources of time and money, and coding takes up 20%. As the team's process becomes repeatable and reuse starts to be capitalized on, project's time to production is shortened, estimates are actually accurate, and budgets are met.

In my career I have come across approximately 20 teams claiming to be agile, one actually was. The rest of them used agile as an excuse to remove internal documentation and use refactoring as the excuse for horrible coding practices and coding efforts put into requirements that were not fully understood. Refactoring exists to improve code design, not fix broken code. So if your team is spending a ton of time refactoring they are wasting your money trying to fix their broken code, not improve their code design. Making changes to fix bugs or correct requirements that were missed to due lack of discipline or poor requirement elicitation practices is simply wasted money. Wasted money because your team does not have the skills to properly execute a proper software development process.

If your team is:
- Missing Dates
- Comes in over budget
- Suffers from unpredicted team member levels (adding unexpected man hours to complete a project)
- Bugs in production
- Development team needs to be part of the maintenance team in order for the maintenance team to understand the application's architecture and module design
- Doing one-off development (cut, paste, and modify the previous project's code base)
- You need to eliminate promised features to hit your dates

Then you are simply failing to executing whatever process you are claiming to have whether that be agile or not. Claiming to be agile is how most teams mask their incompetence. It is a shame because I know agile and lean processes work. What most of the IT industry does not understand is that executing an agile process correctly and delivering a solid product is much more difficult (requires more experience) than executing a traditional process like the Unified Process (UP). Read Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C# to find out what your team should know and be doing to be able to implement an agile process. Very few teams I have come across have the skill level required to do anything with an agile process except create chaos.

One of my experiences turning this around involved removing what a company had deemed to be an agile process and implement an instance of the UP. Please don't get me wrong here, without the proper experience on your team, no process is going to be executed correctly. UP is just a process that includes iteration and milestones deliverables. Executed correctly these deliverables provide confidence as they start being delivered on time and start being used as communication tools during meetings and in other conversations.

The biggest hurdle to get over was the minds of the business owners who had been sold on the idea that agile = chaos (not literally). It doesn't. After a company spends a lot of time in the chaos mode (putting out the hottest production fire, missing dates, going over budget) it is hard to break them out of it. The worthless motion is perceived as productivity, and the internal teams never get the time to step back and take a look at the rat race they are running. Many times no one in the company has ever experienced any other way of doing things. You may have the same difficulty convincing the development teams as well.

Sometimes the only way I have found to break the cycle is to ask for a small project you can execute on your own from scratch to finish, or take on all the jobs considered drudgery yourself on a project team. Doing all the boring documentation, sitting through the long requirements elicitation meetings, simply doing all the stuff that allows a project to succeed but no one wants to do, or they don't know how. The concept is simply know as mentoring. Getting in at every level to help accomplish the tasks that would not be done, or would be done with the attitude of "this is stupid". It is the only way to show the value of the things that make a software development project succeed.

If you can get the development team to play ball, the business will warm up to the new process when dates are hit, they are within budget, and software starts going to production without bugs.

When the fires start going out and the chaos is tamed, the business can actually start thinking about their business.

Some other things Agile does not equal...
Agile Development != Low Ceremony
Agile != Ignoring Requirements

posted by tadanderson at 8:03 AM 1 comments

Previous Posts

  • DevOps: A Software Architect's Perspective Book Re...
  • Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) LiveLessons Video Se...
  • Bulletproof Android: Practical Advice for Building...
  • Swift for Programmers Book Review
  • Security in Computing (5th Edition) Book Review
  • Swift in 24 Hours, Sams Teach Yourself Book Review
  • Sparx Systems Releases Enterprise Architect 12
  • Learning Swift Programming Book Review
  • Android Security Internals: An In-Depth Guide to A...
  • Adaptive Code via C#: Agile coding with design pat...



Archives

  • December 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • June 2006
  • August 2006
  • October 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • March 2007
  • April 2007
  • May 2007
  • June 2007
  • July 2007
  • August 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • November 2007
  • December 2007
  • January 2008
  • February 2008
  • March 2008
  • April 2008
  • May 2008
  • June 2008
  • July 2008
  • August 2008
  • September 2008
  • October 2008
  • December 2008
  • January 2009
  • February 2009
  • March 2009
  • April 2009
  • May 2009
  • June 2009
  • July 2009
  • August 2009
  • September 2009
  • October 2009
  • November 2009
  • December 2009
  • January 2010
  • February 2010
  • March 2010
  • April 2010
  • May 2010
  • June 2010
  • August 2010
  • September 2010
  • October 2010
  • November 2010
  • December 2010
  • January 2011
  • February 2011
  • March 2011
  • April 2011
  • May 2011
  • June 2011
  • July 2011
  • August 2011
  • September 2011
  • October 2011
  • November 2011
  • December 2011
  • January 2012
  • February 2012
  • March 2012
  • April 2012
  • May 2012
  • June 2012
  • July 2012
  • August 2012
  • September 2012
  • October 2012
  • November 2012
  • December 2012
  • January 2013
  • February 2013
  • March 2013
  • April 2013
  • May 2013
  • June 2013
  • July 2013
  • August 2013
  • September 2013
  • October 2013
  • November 2013
  • December 2013
  • January 2014
  • February 2014
  • March 2014
  • April 2014
  • May 2014
  • June 2014
  • July 2014
  • August 2014
  • September 2014
  • October 2014
  • December 2014
  • February 2015
  • March 2015
  • April 2015
  • June 2015
  • July 2015
  • September 2015

Powered by Blogger