Decoupling software components

Decoupling between services could be achieved by simply adding a layer of technical abstraction, like a message queue or a well written interface, between the content producer and the content consumers. Message queues decouple your processes. All that is required is that the sender and the receiver agree on a common format for messages and their content and that they are using the same message broker.

Messages can still be added to the queue and be processed when the system has recovered. If a message fails to be delivered, the message can be redelivered until the message is processed. A message queue makes it easy to scale up a decoupled application. When the incoming message rate is higher than the consumer rate; you can simply add more workers, receivers, whose job is to work off the queues faster.

If you have a web application, you can let this web application generate messages in response to user inputs. The receivers can retrieve these messages and process them and return a response when it is finished. By doing it this way, the user interface can remain responsive.

In the event that no consumer is available to retrieve the message, the message can wait safely in the queue until the receiving component is ready. MQs are typically used to decouple heavyweight processing, to buffer or batch work, and to smooth spiky workloads. By decoupling the producers and consumers, MQs help to build Event-Driven Architecture EDA where components will perform specified action based on the occurrence of events while enabling components to continue to function even in the case of connection failures between them.

Better Performance. MQs enable asynchronous communication, which means the producers and consumers only interact with the queue, not each other. Producers can add requests to the queue without waiting for them to be processed.

Consumers process messages only when they are available. No component in the system is ever stalled waiting for another, optimizing data flow. Messages are persistently stored in the queue until they are retrieved by a consumer. This means if one part of the system goes offline, none of the messages for it will be lost. After the system recovers, it can pick up from where it left off and continue to process the messages. Simplified Decoupling. Decoupling is the process of reducing the degree of dependency between application components.

In a fully decoupled architecture, the individual components can remain completely autonomous and unaware of each other. The entry level for many of the operational positions will rise, and add to it required technological know-how, while the positions themselves will have more responsibility spanning over a larger amount of controlled process. Another trend we are likely to see is more extensive offload of operational functions to third-party service providers, mostly in the realms of development, support, monitoring and DevOps software development and IT operations.

This offloading will enable businesses to cost-efficiently meet the rapidly rising need for more multidisciplinary trained personnel. Though the operational cost per single employee may increase, this change will overall yield a better ROI on operations teams due to improved efficiency and the ability to perform more complex tasks and larger volumes of operations in a lower amount of time.

Max Nirenberg, managing director and CRO, Commit : Aside from special cases, like video cards and their drivers, the current trend is to create as much decoupling as possible between software and hardware components. This is due to the very different lifecycles of both and the different challenges they both face. Due to more complex and costly development and testing cycles, hardware solutions are less flexible by nature than their software companions in terms of the possible speed of introducing new features and capabilities to the market.

For example, as the Internet became faster, more data could be collected and the number of users grew, the hardware world could not keep up.

The demand for increased power, memory, CPU and other server parameters needed to keep working cost efficiently became overwhelming, so, as a solution, the software world began moving from monolith services to distributed systems. This allowed the software components to scale out horizontally.

Instead of needing to invent a more powerful CPU or motherboards that can support more RAM, teams can now take several of the traditional, inexpensive servers and bind them together using the software.

Whenever the need for additional compute power arises, organizations can just add more of the same hardware to answer the demand. The decoupling trend is also moving the industry to create more generic hardware components that can be utilized by software to answer different needs. One aspect of this transition is that more and more logic and heavy lifting has moved from the embedded software layer, which is device-specific and dependent on the hardware parameters, into other application layers such as external servers and cloud solutions.

Decoupling enables the reduction of IoT device hardware requirements in terms of compute demand, power consumption and manufacturing costs.

Improve this answer. Despertar Despertar 5 5 silver badges 7 7 bronze badges. FYI, explicit inversion of control tends to be much less useful in dynamic languages like Python. Furthermore it is unwise to recommend specific OO techniques when you do not know what level the person is or what problems they have.

I presented him with a solution that can address all these problems along with a clear example. I don't expect him to be at any specific level or that this will be a silver bullet for all his problems.

Dependency injection has nothing to do with dynamic vs static typing. It is about having a clear interface which says 'I need these components to work' and can be effective in any language which used correctly. There are cases where inversion of control can indeed have the effect that you want.

However a person who has not developed good general OO design skills blindly attempting to use that technique is going to get into a bad mess. And if, as is likely, the fundamental problem is poor code organization, then inversion of control is not going to help.

As for the dynamic language comment, thanks to late binding, dynamic languages can easily get the main benefits of inversion of control without calling it that, and without invoking any sort of explicit dependency injection framework to make it possible. That is really the whole purpose of this site. To teach and to learn and to spread knowledge. I used to have no idea what dependency injection was until I saw it mentioned on this site, watched some videos and began researching it.

Now it has become another tool in my toolbox. You also have to remember that more than just the author can read this question. Someone may come along with a similar problem and this is just the solution they were looking for. It helps to keep an open mind. Basically my reporting solution evolved like this: A temporary script to show management what is going on. The script only ran as a console app, so I copy and pasted the resulting data into Excel and added some nice formatting and graphs.

The temporary solution became a weekly report and since vacation was near, I added an HTML output through a separate script. The commonly used functions were put into a common library file.

Some business software producing the input changed but the reports were popular. Go became the lingua franca at my job, you can do the same thing in Python as well I assume you are in my world at step 1. Some patterns I remember when doing that: passing many parameters repeatedly to a function? Create a class that can carry all those parameters. Probably some functions could become methods of that class go abstract: I did many grouping, counting and aggregation operations.

I created classes types that perform those operations for many possible table formats. So in a nutshell: remove all the business from the problem at just think of the data types and the transformations you need.

Philip Philip 1, 1 1 gold badge 14 14 silver badges 19 19 bronze badges. Bryan Oakley Bryan Oakley Structure Each module has one function. Dependency Injection But how does Dependency Injection now work without polluting other classes? Jim Martens Jim Martens 1 1 gold badge 4 4 silver badges 7 7 bronze badges.