Architectural reviews
On this page 9 topics
Overview
Topics
- Reviewing designs for risk
- complexity
- and operability
Learn first
3.5 h of practice (estimate)
Learning outcomes
- Review designs from other teams for risk, complexity, and operability quickly and fairly.
- Distinguish blocking issues from preferences and say which is which.
- Ask questions that let teams find problems themselves.
- Track review outcomes and improve the review practice.
Lessons
Lab and exercises
Lab
SRA-017-LAB1 · Review round
Outcomes: 1–4 · Time: ~2.5 h
- Review three designs from other learners (or provided designs) against a risk, complexity, and operability checklist.
- Label each comment as blocking, suggestion, or question; blocking comments state the risk and a path forward.
- Include at least three questions that guide the author to a problem.
- Deliver reviews within the agreed turnaround; authors rate usefulness, fairness, and clarity.
- Record your review outcomes and one change you will make to your practice.
Acceptance: each review separates blocking issues from preferences.
Exercises (case-based; six exercises)
| ID | Outcome | Task |
|---|---|---|
| SRA-017-EX01 | 1 | Review a short design with a queue between two services and list the risks in priority order. |
| SRA-017-EX02 | 1 | Assess a proposal that adds a new database technology for one team: complexity and operability findings. |
| SRA-017-EX03 | 2 | Classify twelve review comments as blocking or preference and rewrite weak blocking comments with risk and path forward. |
| SRA-017-EX04 | 3 | Write five questions that would let a team discover a lost-event risk without you naming it. |
| SRA-017-EX05 | 3 | Rewrite a verdict-style comment ("this design is wrong") into a question and a clear concern. |
| SRA-017-EX06 | 4 | Given review data (turnaround, number of blocking items, outcomes after launch), propose two improvements to the review practice. |
Show solutions
- EX01 Priority: message loss or duplicates, ordering, poison messages, backlog growth, rollback; then operability.
- EX02 New technology costs on-call, expertise, backups, upgrades, and tooling; check whether the existing store meets the need; if not, require an owner, runbooks, and a support plan.
- EX03 Blocking: data loss, missing authentication, no rollback; preference: naming, minor library choice. Rewrite as "[BLOCKING] If X fails, Y data is lost; consider Z or tell me how you prevent it".
- EX04 What if the write succeeds and the publish fails? What if the process restarts? How would we find a missing event? How do consumers recover? How is this tested?
- EX05 "What happens when the second service is down for an hour? I am concerned that requests will queue without bound; how do you limit that?"
- EX06 Example: reduce turnaround with a two-day target and a template; track defects found in production that the review missed; review blocking items quarterly.
Outcome 4 is also covered by the lab record of outcomes.
Workplace evidence: reviews you gave that changed designs before they shipped.
Quiz
Outcomes: O1 reviewing for risk, complexity, operability · O2 blocking vs preference · O3 questions that teach · O4 improving the practice.
A self-check for you: nothing is graded, saved or sent anywhere. Choose an answer, then check it. You can try again as often as you like.
Practical part
Six case exercises SRA-017-EX01 to EX06 plus the review round lab. Pass: quiz at least 8/10, and a review-quality rubric from authors in which every review separates blocking issues from preferences and states a path forward.
Common mistakes
Reviewing to show expertise; vague concerns without a path forward.
Assessment
Review-quality rubric scored by authors.
Workplace evidence
Reviews you gave that changed designs before they shipped.
Career relevance
Architecture review boards and assurance (ARC-035, ARC-042).