Design Patterns
Quinton Wall's Blog |
March 1, 2007 11:01 AM
|
Comments (2)
I've been paddling around the waters of the SOA environ for a while now and as always in IT the landscape keeps morphing into something different. Just when I hang my hat somewhere it dissolves into something different. This is not necessarily a bad thing and underpins the need for flexibility but how does one handle this change?
I have always been a fan of the abstract approach of looking at design. Identify the patterns and you understand how the pieces fit together. Remember the gang of four Design patterns book which was written decades ago before SOA was even a thought. Many of the patterns are still very relevant now but just as always new ideas and approaches are evolving all the time. I am yet to see a good collection of SOA patterns that avoids the tight coupling of product/technology/etc.
Much of this would likely start with reference architectures as a lingua franca to define logical groupings and patterns which is a great way to provide structure and form. Consider a craftman building a chair. They start with a blueprint that structures a purpose (the chair is for a bar vs. an office vs. relaxing at home). This blueprint leads to an architecture (I am building a bar stool so I only need 3 legs vs. 4 for a lounge chair) which is often used by the craftsman to start shaping the wood. The tricky bit is where the craftsman needs to interact with a colleague who produces the padding.
This is obviously the importance for patterns, the SOAscape only increases the need for more patterns especially in regards to data structures, messaging and so on. I can only hope one day my ragged and worn copy of Design Patterns may find a new partner. Fowler's Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture is already nestled close on the shelf but there still seems a need for more.
Perhaps the answer is folksonomy or other people based approaches popular with the Web2.0 movement. These designs are compellingly important in some fashion but how is the craftsman building a chair to prepare his frame so that it can be used by any venue be it a dingy bar or a 5-star restaurant. I guess, again the answer lies in good design. The ability to re-purpose the ordinary and make it extraordinary. Sometimes it may not be comfortable but it sure makes a statement.
Comments
Comments are listed in date ascending order (oldest first) | Post Comment
-
I guess you can only do something like this when you have something more substantial than just the concepts. For example, here's something for a service bus: Practical Enterprise Service Bus Use Cases for SOA. I think what I'd like to see is something like this for all the *physical* embodiments of the SOA concepts. So design patterns for using SOA and a service bus. Using the service bus and an enterprise repository in an SOA context. Using data services and service bus in an SOA context etc. Then I can use the design patterns (describing some problem in the SOA domain) and map them to a solution (use SB and DS in *this* way) etc.
Posted by: jonmountjoy on March 2, 2007 at 3:12 AM
-
This may not be the type of design comment you'd expect, and I enjoyed your thoughts on patterns in the design of SOA.
After spending time in the fields of art, learning, and neuropsychology, I am amazed at how important patterns are. Not that I've become an expert in any of these fields. Patterns seemed to be key in designing a painting, photograph, or even a course. What patterns we neglect to expand our audience or clients do by necessity, and what problems that causes. Its just the way our brains work--for better or for worse.
What I find frustrating is that when I want to be original in my design, its difficult to know what element to put on it's head. If I create the wrong kind of discomfort for my audience, I lose them. If I create the correct kind of change or discomfort, I'm innovative and original. Ahh, knowing what patterns to break or change is the heavy lifting of design...
Posted by: bfenimor on March 26, 2007 at 9:50 AM
|
