问题描述
我目前的任务是为软件开发创建文档化，一致的体系结构指南.我们有很多聪明的人在做正确的事情，但只是不一致和可重复.
I am currently tasked with creating a documented, consistent Architecture guide for software development. We have a lot of smart people doing the right things, but just not consistently and repeatably.
我们以Microsoft的应用程序体系结构指南2.0为起点.因此，提出一个应用程序架构相当(我不会说容易).可能是因为我有几年的开发经验，所以我对这个领域有很好的了解，并且还有许多示例和指南.
We are using Microsoft’s Application Architecture Guide 2.0 as a starting point. Hence coming up with an Application Architecture is fairly (I won't say easy) straight forward. Possibly because I have a couple of years experience as a developer so I have a pretty good understanding of this realm and there are also loads of examples and guidance.
由于我们组织中有几个应用程序构成了一个或多个系统，然后我们在客户端"上安装了这些应用程序……我们认为创建系统体系结构和企业体系结构也是有意义的.这是问题开始的地方.
Since our organisation has a couple of applications that form 1 or more systems which we then install "at" clients... we thought it would make sense to create a System Architecture and an Enterprise Architecture as well. And this is where the problems start.
那里没有一致的指导.如果您搜索系统体系结构示例"，则返回的内容是如此不同，以至于我想知道是否存在标准"方式来做到这一点.
There is no consistent guidance out there. If you search for "System Architecture Examples", the stuff that you get back is so different that I am wondering if there is a "Standard" way to do this.
根据我对(全部)的理解，系统体系结构是对一个或多个应用程序体系结构的抽象，描述了它们如何协同工作以形成一个系统.此外，企业体系结构是进一步的抽象，显示了您的系统如何适合组织企业以及它如何与业务流程，IT战略交互以及如何与企业其他系统集成.
From my (Limited - clearly) understanding of it all, the System Architecture is an abstraction of 1 or more application architectures depicting how they work together to form a system. Furthermore, an Enterprise Architecture is a further abstraction showing how your system(s) fit into a organisations Enterprise and how it interacts with the Business processes, IT Strategy and how it Integrats into other systems in the enterprise.
- 我完全错了吗?
- 那里有任何标准(我在哪里可以找到它们)?
- 是否应该有标准，或者好的"系统体系结构应该仅仅是任何格式的任何文档，而这些格式对于读者来说显然是很容易理解和有用的?
- 经验丰富的建筑师会对这种方法有什么看法?
我不想简单地列出一组可能有用的与SOA相关的模式...我想使其更加集中于我们所做的事情，即在面向服务的基础上构建财务解决方案建筑.
I don't want to simply list a set of SOA related patterns that may be useful... I'd like to make it a little more focused to what we do, which is the build financial solutions on a Service Orientated Architecture.
更新:关于 TOGAF(9).是否有人有经验，值得尝试详细了解它.
Update: What about TOGAF(9). Does anyone have experience with it at all and is it worth the effort of trying to understand it in detail.
推荐答案
我是几天前提交的问题，但经过不断研究并阅读了的回复，我想我已经找到了一份有趣的白皮书，我发现该白皮书非常有益且有趣.
I submitted the question a couple of days ago, but by continued research and after reading littlegeek's reponse, I think I have found an interesting white paper that I found very informative and interesting.
阅读:前四种企业架构方法的比较创建人:Roger Sessions
Read: A Comparison of the Top Four Enterprise-Architecture MethodologiesBy: Roger Sessions
摘要...
-----------8< ------------
-- - - - - - - - - - - 8< - - - - - - - - - - - -
在过去的20年中，许多企业架构方法都来了又去了.此时，也许有90％的领域使用以下四种方法之一:
Many enterprise-architectural methodologies have come and gone in the last 20 years. At this point, perhaps 90 percent of the field use one of these four methodologies:
- Zachman企业体系结构框架-尽管自称为框架，但实际上更准确地定义为分类法
- 开放小组架构框架(TOGAF)-尽管称为框架，但实际上更准确地定义为流程
- 联邦企业体系结构-可以被视为已实施的企业体系结构或用于创建企业体系结构的说明性方法
- Gartner方法论-可以最好地描述为企业架构实践
本白皮书讨论了这四种用于企业体系结构的方法.这样做是在一家虚构的公司面临一些非虚构的运营问题的情况下进行的.这些问题包括:
This white paper discusses these four approaches to enterprise architecture. It does so within the context of a fictional company that is facing some very nonfictional operations problems. These problems include:
- IT系统变得难以管理，维护成本也越来越高. 阻碍组织及时和经济高效地应对当前和未来市场状况的能力的IT系统.
- 关键任务信息始终过时和/或完全错误.
- 组织的业务和技术部门之间的不信任文化.
- IT systems that have become unmanageably complex and increasingly costly to maintain.
- IT systems that are hindering the organization's ability to respond to current, and future, market conditions in a timely and cost-effective manner.
- Mission-critical information that is consistently out-of-date and/or just plain wrong.
- A culture of distrust between the business and technology sides of the organization.
-----------8< ------------
-- - - - - - - - - - - 8< - - - - - - - - - - - -
白皮书以多种方式帮助了我.
The White Paper helped me in several ways.
- 它给了我关于体系结构(特别是企业体系结构)的很好的介绍和历史
- 它向我介绍了作者建议的四种可用的领先企业体系结构.
- 然后继续以逻辑和简单的方式将它们与我可能涉及的良好示例进行比较.
我不能说我所有的问题都已经回答了，现在我准备死了:-)，但是很多事情已经变得更加清楚了，因此我认为那里的其他人也可能会觉得有用.
I cannot say that all my questions have been answered and I am now ready to die :-), but much has become clearer and thus I thought that someone else out there may also find this useful.
对于您可能对此主题提出的任何其他评论，建议和问题，我仍然会重视.
I would still value any additional comments, suggestions and questions you may have on this subject.
这篇关于企业，系统和应用程序体系结构(最佳实践?)的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持！