Evaluating Your Architecture Using the Six Architecture Views

Evaluating an architecture effectively requires a multidimensional approach that comprehensively examines various aspects of a system. The “Six Architecture Views” methodology provides such a framework, enabling architects and stakeholders to assess the system’s structure, behavior, and alignment with business goals. Each view represents a different facet of the architecture and helps ensure that all critical concerns are addressed. These views are: the Logical View, Development View, Process View, Physical View, Scenarios (or Use Case) View, and Data View. This article explores each of these views in detail and explains how they can be used to evaluate and refine software architecture.

Logical View

The logical view focuses on the functionality of the system from the perspective of the end user and the system’s conceptual design. It identifies the major components or modules, their responsibilities, and their relationships with one another. This view is particularly useful for understanding how the system will meet its functional requirements.

Key considerations when evaluating the logical view include:

• Modularity: Are responsibilities appropriately divided among components?

• Cohesion and Coupling: Are modules highly cohesive and loosely coupled?

• Scalability: Can components be scaled independently?

• Reusability: Are there opportunities to reuse components across different systems?

Tools such as Unified Modeling Language (UML) class diagrams, component diagrams, and package diagrams are typically used to represent the logical view. This perspective is essential for software developers, analysts, and architects to ensure the system’s internal logic supports required functionality.

Development View

Also known as the implementation view, the development view addresses the system from a programmer’s perspective and focuses on the organization of the software in the development environment. This includes source code structure, build management, and configuration control.

Evaluation metrics include:

• Code organization: Is the codebase organized for maintainability?

• Build process: Is there a clear and automated build and deployment process?

• Versioning and branching: Is the code managed with effective version control practices?

• Technology stack: Are appropriate technologies selected for implementation?

This view is often represented through UML component diagrams and directory structure charts. It supports maintainability, code reuse, and efficient software production, which are essential for long-term project sustainability.

Process View

The process view focuses on the dynamic aspects of the system, describing how the system’s processes interact and how they communicate and synchronize. It addresses runtime behavior, concurrency, and performance aspects.

Important elements in evaluating the process view:

• Concurrency: How does the system handle parallel processing?

• Thread management: Are threads managed efficiently and safely?

• Communication mechanisms: Are appropriate inter-process communication methods used?

• Scalability and performance: Does the design support performance goals under load?

This view is commonly illustrated using UML activity diagrams, sequence diagrams, and state diagrams. It is particularly valuable for systems with high performance or availability requirements, such as real-time or distributed systems.

Physical View

Also known as the deployment view, the physical view depicts how the software system maps onto the hardware infrastructure. It addresses concerns such as system distribution, network communication, and physical resource allocation.

Key evaluation aspects include:

• Deployment topology: Is the deployment architecture optimized for availability and performance?

• Redundancy and failover: Are mechanisms in place for fault tolerance?

• Resource allocation: Are computing resources efficiently used?

• Security: Is the deployment architecture secure from external and internal threats?

This view is often documented through deployment diagrams, showing servers, devices, network links, and how software artifacts are deployed across them. It is critical for IT operations and system administrators responsible for hosting and managing the system.

Scenarios (Use Case View)

The scenarios or use case view ties all other views together by demonstrating how the system behaves in real-world situations. It focuses on validating the architecture against business use cases and requirements.

Evaluation focuses on:

• Use case coverage: Do the scenarios represent all critical functional and non-functional requirements?

• Traceability: Can each use case be traced to elements in the other architectural views?

• Integration and consistency: Do the views integrate coherently when addressing specific scenarios?

Scenarios are typically represented as use case diagrams, user stories, or business process flows. This view helps stakeholders understand the system’s practical application and validate that it meets business needs.

Data View

Though not traditionally one of the original views, the data view has gained importance and is often considered a sixth essential perspective. It focuses on how data is stored, accessed, and managed across the system.

Key evaluation criteria include:

• Data integrity and consistency: Are constraints and validation rules properly enforced?

• Data flow: How does data move between components and systems?

• Storage strategy: Are appropriate storage technologies and schemas used?

• Data privacy and security: Are data access and encryption policies in place?

This view is typically depicted with entity-relationship diagrams, data flow diagrams, and schema documentation. It is crucial for evaluating system compliance with data governance and security regulations.

Integrating the Six Views

Each of these views offers a unique lens through which the architecture can be examined. However, the true power of this framework comes from using all six in concert. A comprehensive architecture evaluation ensures that:

• Functional requirements are met (Logical, Scenario Views)

• The system is maintainable and efficiently developed (Development View)

• Runtime behavior and performance are robust (Process View)

• The system can be reliably deployed and operated (Physical View)

• Data is handled securely and effectively (Data View)

Aligning these views also facilitates better communication among stakeholders. Business analysts can focus on scenarios, developers on logical and development views, operations on the physical view, and data engineers on the data view. This alignment reduces gaps in understanding and promotes system coherence.

Applying the Six Views in Practice

When evaluating an existing architecture or designing a new one, consider the following steps:

1. Document each view: Use standard modeling tools and notations to create artifacts for each view.

2. Engage stakeholders: Collaborate with relevant parties to validate each view.

3. Identify risks and gaps: Look for inconsistencies, missing elements, or areas of concern.

4. Refine and iterate: Use the feedback to refine architectural decisions and improve the design.

5. Perform scenario walkthroughs: Use real-world use cases to validate the interaction between views.

By systematically evaluating architecture through these six views, organizations can ensure that systems are robust, adaptable, and aligned with strategic objectives. It leads to architectures that not only fulfill current requirements but also support future growth and innovation.