Second day of overall architecture design review

Yesterday, I finally officially started to participate in the overall architecture design review. Third parties, Party A, Party B, and us are involved in the review. From the first day of the review, although the project has undergone several months of preliminary demand research and exchange, as well as various online and offline communication, however, Party B does not seem to fully understand Party A's requirements for non-functional requirements, and there are differences in understanding the basic elements such as the construction goal and cutover scope. At the same time, the overall architecture design scheme does not cover key non-functional requirements such as performance, recoverability, security, high availability, maintainability, and internal control assurance, most of the content is just a list of technologies and terms, and does not talk about how to put these technologies into the entire huge system.

The four persons who participated in the overall architecture design review by Party B seem to be responsible for the development of specific modules. When talking about the content, they will go into battle and talk about it well, from the business scenario to the specific technology, it is quite satisfying, but if it is out of this range, it immediately changes people. The other person seems to be the overall technical leader, but the attitude is terrible, if Party A raises any question or detailed requirements on the overall architecture design scheme, this proposal immediately sets out an attitude of despising Party A and does not cooperate in any way. It disclaims some of Party A's requirements, while turning around, let yourself reply to the conflict... Both words and tone Make people very uncomfortable, and they always like to pull questions everywhere. In a moment, they pull something in the stream of consciousness, and in a moment, there is a specific implementation details, there is no overall architecture design review of the expected height and system thinking-it seems that 40 people are also running, but the performance is so unprofessional, arrogant, alas... I don't know if the technology will take too long.

Relatively speaking, the lineup of Party A's participation in the overall design review is very luxurious, and the Business backbone of each department is fully in place. The business background is needless to say, the system construction experience is also very rich, and the problem is clearly expressed, always focus on the overall system architecture and construction objectives, while also reviewing and teaching Party B how to write the requirement documents, how to design the overall architecture, what should be included in the overall architecture design, it is worth learning the height and the specific design documents.

Of course, from the review, we can also see that if Party B is not familiar with the business, not only the overall architecture design is not good, but it will always be challenge by Party A, and finally it will become stuck in the way...

 

P.s. Zhaoxing is holding a meeting in the next-door meeting room today. There are a lot of beautiful mm and eye-catching