search

GSMA-CPAS / BWRP

Blockchain Wholesale Roaming Project
Apache License 2.0
2 stars 0 forks source link

Microservice arch. proposal for Layer 2.5 #18

Open ldudzinski01 opened 3 years ago

ldudzinski01 commented 3 years ago

The current common-adapter is being developed as a single component. For the purpose of MVP such approach is not only sufficient but also can speed up overall development which seems to be crucial at this stage of the project. However, the ultimate goal is to provide full-fledged solution which must meet stringent requirements of a production environment. For this reason it seems to be a good idea to consider microservices oriented approach when defining the overall architecture.

Initial analysis can be found in the attached slides. Still, there are number of issues that must be investigated and agreed. Microservices_v1.0.pptx

zkong-gsma commented 3 years ago

can we only open this item in the future or put it on "backlog" for the time being as its not feasible for the current timeline.

dominikskrobacz commented 3 years ago

I think that we should label it as discussion. We do not have to implementing right now, but there is no obstacles to find answers and solutions for all potential issues that was raise up during last discussion.

zkong-gsma commented 3 years ago

That is what I included in the option.

Put it under “backlog” :D

From: Dominik Skrobacz notifications@github.com Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2021 1:41 PM To: GSMA-CPAS/BWRP BWRP@noreply.github.com Cc: Zhen Kong ZKong@gsma.com; Comment comment@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [GSMA-CPAS/BWRP] Microservice arch. proposal for Layer 2.5 (#18)

“This email has been received from an external source – please review before actioning, clicking on links, or opening attachments”

I think that we should label it as discussion. We do not have to implementing right now, but there is no obstacles to find answers and solutions for all potential issues that was rase up during last discussion.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FGSMA-CPAS%2FBWRP%2Fissues%2F18%23issuecomment-764649578&data=04%7C01%7Czkong%40gsma.com%7Cdc8f800bb8db45959d7008d8be1236b5%7C72a4ff82fec3469daafbac8276216699%7C0%7C0%7C637468332731487005%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=lxygXZrg%2F8eW1BmJ2apEm4vPiMFa2JqJm1OPqiv3nfo%3D&reserved=0, or unsubscribehttps://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FAEJMGRAXNE2HXJZBZPZVQQDS3AVHNANCNFSM4WM3MWLA&data=04%7C01%7Czkong%40gsma.com%7Cdc8f800bb8db45959d7008d8be1236b5%7C72a4ff82fec3469daafbac8276216699%7C0%7C0%7C637468332731496998%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=y5DuFeNeZfV%2F6AMnMyzub8MlI3%2F3yYKbQT0aeb0H14M%3D&reserved=0.

.

ldudzinski01 commented 3 years ago

Issues to investigate:

1) Single database referenced by multiple services can become the centre of errors. You can use one database but then the boundaries should be defined very clearly for example when signatures needs contract data they should fetch it from the service and not directly from the database. Because the contract team could have a change on the internal model.

2) Interactions between services: for defined processes/business procedures we need to check interaction model between services in microservices setup. This model shouldn't be a source of further complications. Conversely, if there is a need it should provide ability to nicely compose any function now and down the line.

Feel free to add any other issues.

ldudzinski01 commented 3 years ago

MicroservicesWVolume.pptx Evolutionary path slides.