Dependency Modelling
Posted: 17 Aug 2016, 04:44
Version: 5.0.5
With reference to:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=200
Hello,
Where and how does one unambiguously represent Application Provider A's physical dependency on Application Provider B, such that if B doesn't exist (or fails), A also fails.
Example:
I have two Application Providers, A and B. A sends data to B, and if B fails (or simply doesn't exist) then A will fail. A, therefore, has a physical dependency on B. B could be a web service, or message queue, or some other receiver of A's data, either on the same node or a different node.
In thea Static Architecture for A, I add A and B, then drag from A to B which creates a "A depends on B" line.
The Impact Analysis view for A shows what I want, that A "would be impacted by the removal of or changes to" B
However, if I understand the above post correctly, drawing the Static Architecture this way is actually saying that A consumes data from B, and this is indeed reflected in the Application Dependencies view for A, where there is a big arrow from B to A presumably indicating that data flows from B to A.
However, it is A that sends data to B, and B must exist for A to function.
To repeat the question, how does one unambiguously represent A's physical dependency on B, such that if B doesn't exist (or fails), A is impacted (e.g. fails).
Many thanks
Bradley
With reference to:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=200
Hello,
Where and how does one unambiguously represent Application Provider A's physical dependency on Application Provider B, such that if B doesn't exist (or fails), A also fails.
Example:
I have two Application Providers, A and B. A sends data to B, and if B fails (or simply doesn't exist) then A will fail. A, therefore, has a physical dependency on B. B could be a web service, or message queue, or some other receiver of A's data, either on the same node or a different node.
In thea Static Architecture for A, I add A and B, then drag from A to B which creates a "A depends on B" line.
The Impact Analysis view for A shows what I want, that A "would be impacted by the removal of or changes to" B
However, if I understand the above post correctly, drawing the Static Architecture this way is actually saying that A consumes data from B, and this is indeed reflected in the Application Dependencies view for A, where there is a big arrow from B to A presumably indicating that data flows from B to A.
However, it is A that sends data to B, and B must exist for A to function.
To repeat the question, how does one unambiguously represent A's physical dependency on B, such that if B doesn't exist (or fails), A is impacted (e.g. fails).
Many thanks
Bradley