#Domain driven design vs soa software
#Domain driven design vs soa code
#Domain driven design vs soa Pc

2.2 Command Query Responsibility SegregationР”Вomain-driven design articulates a number of high-level concepts and practices.2.1 Model-driven engineering and architecture.The term was coined by Eric Evans in his book of the same title published in 2003. While domain-driven design provides benefits such as maintainability, Microsoft recommends it only for complex domains where the model provides clear benefits in formulating a common understanding of the domain. initiating a creative collaboration between technical and domain experts to iteratively refine a conceptual model that addresses particular domain problems.Р”В¬riticisms of domain-driven design argue that developers must typically implement a great deal of isolation and encapsulation to maintain the model as a pure and helpful construct.basing complex designs on a model of the domain.placing the project's primary focus on the core domain and domain logic.Р”Вomain-driven design is predicated on the following goals:

#Domain driven design vs soa software

For example, if a software processes loan applications, it might have classes like LoanApplication and Customer, and methods such as AcceptOffer and Withdraw.Р”ВDD connects the implementation to an evolving model.

#Domain driven design vs soa code

One concept is that the structure and language of software code (class names, class methods, class variables) should match the business domain.

#Domain driven design vs soa Pc

SOA is at a higher level than DDD like 'if SOA is the PC Architecture, then DDD is the Processor Architecture'.Domain-driven design ( DDD) is a software design approach focusing on modelling software to match a domain according to input from that domain's experts. But the domain model gives detail about repositories, Aggregates.

Also, SOA never speaks about how u store objects or retrieve objects or aggregation of objects. The client doesnt need to know whether DDD is used or any other Model is used to Implement service. DDD is just a Domain Model.Р”ВDD just sits inside the Business logic layer of SOA. From what i understand SOA is a Distributed Application Architecture. Using the messaging features of a DBMS, like Sql Server Service Broker, is an entirely different matter and does fall under the 'shared infrastructure' you mentioned. Regardless of SOA, I would not use a data source as a bounary between apps. Backdooring them through the database does not seem to fit that definition. Whose stored procs are those? Can the other application change them, or add constraints, triggers, etc? What if they do and it breaks your app?Р”В¬ommunicating, in my book, means letting the listening party decide what to do with the information you send them. When two 'applications' communicate, although I'd hardly call it that, through a shared data source (what's been called a database), then the boundaries where one application stops and the other starts gets blurred.

There's a difference between sharing infrastructure like a DBMS, or physical database server, and sharing a data source. Often they also understand that each of those applications' implementations may be distributed - with parts of the application communicating with each other through a method of integration - file sharing, shared database, remote method invocation or messaging.Р”Вoes service orientation in the real world really make database or other shared infrastructure boundaries any clearer? Most basically understand the boundaries of their payroll, ordering and CRM applications. But 'application' is probably one term that most people can identify with reasonably easily. Your point about bluring boundaries is an important one IMHO, and certainly 'service' and 'component' are terms that are overloaded in use and understanding. On the question of orthogonality of DDD and a Service, I would suggest that just because you can use DDD, RAD or scripting to implement a Service, doesn't make them 'orthogonal'. So, whose database is it?Р”Р„nyway, good to hear your thoughts on the subject. For example, databases are often considered to be inside a distributed application, however they are also often used by other applications as well. Personally, I object to the term 'distributed application' in that it blurs boundaries that are important. The only difference between orthogonal and 'totally unrelated', in my opinion, is that orthogonal 'things' have an intersection point - you yourself said it DDD can be used to implement a service.Р”Р„s to your point about 'applications', I'd have to say that seeing as the terms 'service' and 'component' are ill defined, 'application' shouldn't be much different.