결제 전환 목표 아키텍처 정의 (1/2) (1/2) (SPRING-ARC-REFERENCE-1783832425)
All checks were successful
ci / test (pull_request) Successful in 7s
All checks were successful
ci / test (pull_request) Successful in 7s
This commit is contained in:
parent
79358fd2cc
commit
7a4656a3a9
1 changed files with 25 additions and 0 deletions
25
docs/architecture/adr-payment-boundary.md
Normal file
25
docs/architecture/adr-payment-boundary.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
|
||||||
|
# Architecture Decision Record: Payment Boundary
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Context
|
||||||
|
In the process of defining a payment transition architecture, it is essential to delineate clear boundaries regarding payments. This includes how payments are processed, managed, and interacted with other services within the larger application ecosystem.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Decision
|
||||||
|
The payment boundary will be established to segregate payment functionalities from other domains. This will facilitate clearer service contracts, promote scalability, and enhance maintainability. The boundaries defined are:
|
||||||
|
1. **Payment Processing** - Manage all transaction flows, including initiation, validation, and completion.
|
||||||
|
2. **Payment Storage** - Handle data persistence for transactions, ensuring compliance with security protocols.
|
||||||
|
3. **Payment Notifications** - Direct communication with users and systems regarding the status of transactions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Additional services such as audits and reporting will be encapsulated within the payment context but operate on a separate service layer.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Alternatives
|
||||||
|
- **Single Service**: All payment functionalities within one service.
|
||||||
|
- **Pros**: Simplicity in managing.
|
||||||
|
- **Cons**: Difficult to scale and maintain, especially with increased complexity.
|
||||||
|
- **Microservices**: Distributed payment functions.
|
||||||
|
- **Pros**: Improved separation of concerns, easier to manage separately.
|
||||||
|
- **Cons**: Increased complexity in inter-service communication.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The decision leans towards microservices for better scalability and maintainability of the payment system.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Consequences
|
||||||
|
Implementing a microservices approach to the payment boundary means that each service can be scaled independently, enhancing performance. However, it also requires robust inter-service communication strategies and potentially higher operational overhead due to multiple service deployments.
|
||||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue