Chapter 1 - I am here to kill the aggregate

-

The aggregate has always been, for me, one of the most controversial and weakest elements of Domain Driven Design.

During my consultancy activity, I have been able to verify that the full understanding of the aggregate concept remains difficult for many. It is easy to make mistakes in the modeling phase, which will be very complex to fix in more advanced stages of development.

As a result, some developers feel that the whole architecture is excessively difficult and complicated.

I want to show you another world, where there is no aggregate. I am here to kill the aggregate.


For those unfamiliar with it, let me introduce it to you.

The Aggregate


Its definition is, in my opinion, is quite vague:

An aggregate is a cluster of associated objects 
that we treat as a unit for the purpose of data changes.

From blue book - Domain-Driven Design: Tackling Complexity in the Heart of Software - Eric Evans

If you are confused by this definition, let's try to read what the blue book recommends for moving from theory to practice:

Cluster the ENTITIES and VALUE OBJECTS into AGGREGATES and define boundaries around each. 
Choose one ENTITY to be the root of each AGGREGATE, and control all access to the objects inside the boundary through the root. Allow external objects to hold reference to the root only.

From blue book - Domain-Driven Design: Tackling Complexity in the Heart of Software - Eric Evans

Do these rules of thumb really help us build our own "instinct" for spotting aggregates in our domain?
I don't think so...

I'd like to present a practical example, to better understand the pitfalls of the aggregate.
I found 5 main criticalities of the aggregate, that I matched with 5 villains from Kill Bill movies.


Let's simulate a simple modeling exercise using Event Storming. The domain is the educational domain. The rules are the following:
  1. A course cannot accept more than N students
  2. N, the Course Capacity, can change at any time to any positive integer different from the current one (even if the number of currently subscribed students is larger than the new value)

First, let's identify the events.

After the course has been created, it may happen that a student subscribes to the course, or unsubscribes. Course capacity may be updated from time to time.

Let us now analyze the trigger of these events. In our example, all these events are triggered by commands sent by the user.




So far, so good.

The story continues to the next chapter
Chapter 2 - The Aggregate does not fit the storytelling

... or watch the full story on youtube

Location: Parma, Province of Parma, Italy

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Chapter 2 - The Aggregate does not fit the storytelling

-
Image
continues from   Chapter 1 - I am here to kill the aggregate ...... One of the most powerful elements of DDD is that it has broken down the barriers between technicians and domain experts, thanks to tools capable of exploiting the immense potential of storytelling, first of all Event Storming. Storytelling is at the heart of human communication. Storytelling does not require any special competence or skill. It helps break down the barriers between technicians and business experts. In my experience, the usage of storytelling ensures an exceptional fluidity in the domain discovery process, but it hits a snag when we try to introduce the aggregate into the story. Indeed, by definition, the aggregate is the boundary of consistency. The aggregate is the component responsible for ensuring strong consistency constraints within an ecosystem that is, by nature, eventually consistent. But, at the same time, it tries to represent the business entity acting as the guardian of a set of bus...
Read more

Chapter 10 - The Aggregate is dead

-
Image
continues from  Chapter 9 - An event is just a fact, pure ...... The aggregate is finally dead, together with its negative aspects. This new approach, which focuses on the decision block, has several benefits: Perfect match with storytelling Focus on behavior instead of model Less contention Less complexity  Simpler to refactor But be careful: this does not mean having to organize the system in order to have hundreds of completely unrelated command handlers. Absolutely not! Clustering commands into logical groups and delegating their execution to the same model is and remains a correct programming approach. The difference lies in the fact that before, by the very definition of aggregate, these models necessarily had to be isolated from each other. Killing the aggregate means admitting the possibility of contamination between these models without renouncing consistency. A less dogmatic approach, which in any case must not disregard good programming practices, but which, thanks ...
Read more