complexity-review

Reviewing technical proposals involves assessing them against 30 complexity dimensions to question scale, consistency, and resilience assumptions. This identifies simpler, safer, and more reversible alternatives to the proposed approach.

A simpler architecture often suffices. Evaluating proposals against complexity dimensions helps determine if PostgreSQL and cron jobs are adequate instead of adopting microservices, Kafka, or event sourcing, thereby saving significant operational overhead.

The best way to assess system design risk is by systematically reviewing proposals against 30 complexity dimensions. This questions assumptions about resilience and consistency to determine what infrastructure complexity can be safely postponed.

To find simpler alternatives, systematically analyze the technical proposal to propose progressively simpler versions of the approach. This highlights features or infrastructure that can be deferred to ensure safer, more reversible solutions.

You should not use Kafka when a complexity review determines that simpler alternatives like a PostgreSQL database and cron jobs would suffice for your current scale. This helps avoid unnecessary operational overhead and infrastructure complexity.