The Need for Good
System Design
While developing products, every architecture decision impacts its quality, performance, maintainability, and future success. Without good design, long-term consequences can put your system at risk.
What is Good System Design
This phase describes the application’s expected behaviour in a clear, actionable, measurable, and traceable business requirement.
How the system’s different modules communicate with each other, what language or data storage is to be used (software architecture) and selecting data structures and algorithms, defining responsibilities and functions of individual modules/components (system design).
Designing a system is faster and less expensive than building it. But, getting its architecture right is capital. If the architecture is defective, it becomes costly to maintain or extend a system once it’s built.
Decomposing any system into its comprising components is the role of good architecture. Erroneous decomposition incurs unfortunate long-term consequences that can lead to a complete system rewrite.
Companies should be mindful that each architecture decision affects the quality, performance, maintainability and future system success. To not considering common problems and long-term challenges can put your system at risk.
Due to systems evolving nature, a software architect can’t always know everything upfront. This reality is why, at CodeAttest, our software architects continuously learns from system design and tests it against real-world requirements.
The aim is to prevent any software defect and realign the development process early.
Control Technical Debt
• Implementation defects (bugs in code)
• Design flaws
It’s impossible to fix flaws by merely implementing a good code review program after the development phase.
You’ll likely miss essential breaks, which will result in sub-optimal performance. It is far more cost-effective to identify and remediate design flaws early in the design process than patching flawed design implementations after deployment.
At CodeAttest, we use a light-weight approach to identify and
course-correct any faults in the development cycle using a four ways approach:
1. Analyze fundamental design principles.
2. Assess the attack surface.
3. Enumerate various threat agents.
4. Identify weaknesses and gaps in security controls.
With our architecture and design reviews, our clients end up with almost no reduce technical debt in long term and end up with top-of-the-line product quality. That’s our guarantee.
A Fast Approach
Our approach takes less time to conduct and requires fewer people to perform than
traditional reviews. Additionally, this approach is remarkably capable and can be assignable to an entire application portfolio.
It’s a fast approach that allows businesses to avoid systemic shortcomings at the design and implementation level. Product user-experience is of higher quality, downtime and support ticket less abundant and overall a better bottom line.
Trademarks and brands are property of their respective owners.