Does server side programming have to start with writing business at the beginning?

Let me share my opinion.

In many industries, there is a very important thing called industry experience. The same goes for programmers, but on the surface it's less important than some industries. Many people are familiar with design patterns.

This isn't about the relationship between design pattern capabilities and architecture, but people are more concerned about <> if you don't have the corresponding industry experience

The above architecture is almost impossible. Of course, if a company can describe its requirements and associated boundaries in a very precise, clear, detailed, and even mathematical way, perhaps the architecture doesn't need to know much about the business. Maybe that's just it.

As a simple example, when you're doing architecture, do you want to understand the distribution of curd operations at different data levels? How do you balance throughput and latency? There are as many operations as possible are required without losing data, which data can be modified, and which ones can be allowed to lose operations?

Do I need to distribute something? It's just the point of convergence of business needs, and the confirmation of the boundaries of performance requirements gives you a headache. These are all things that they need to be familiar with in their business.

If you can adapt to a variety of needs by configuring a robust system, then we can't say that such a system, even if it is complex, can come at a considerable cost to each adjustment. So even under this ideal assumption, you need to be familiar with the business. In fact, what you know at the framework level, or what you say at the bottom of the network architecture layer, doesn't necessarily contradict the business requirements.

You can write out the logic completely, ask some questions or questions to your ex, and make your own point of view. Sometimes, when you're in the middle of development, you can reach out to some framework-level **. Reading and thinking is one way to get away from more information outside of work.

In practice, in my personal experience, you always have a lot of opportunities to learn about your department, and even the technical knowledge of other doors, depending on how you do it yourself. But in the end, there's not much support for the understanding of business, and you can't make a sufficiently effective architecture.

After reading the subject's question,I think the business is the upper echelon. The underlying framework is the upper-level service. You don't understand the underlying framework of business writing, which is equivalent to not writing business for requirements.

Let me tell you what I think about it.

In many industries, there is a very important thing called industry experience. The same is true for development, but it doesn't seem important on the surface compared to some industries, but it's still necessary on the inside.

Understanding what's at the framework level, or how you think about the underlying network architecture, doesn't necessarily contradict business needs. You can always ask senior people questions or problems about logic, and you can also come up with your own ideas. There are also times when you can access some frameworks during developmentReading and thinking about yourself is also a way to learn more informationAnd not your own work.

Essentially, the quantity of requirements is an inverted pyramid structure, causing most people to do trivial and boring things, and there are many variations in the characteristics of the business system. The core of the network is these things, one person can complete it, make changes, change people if it can't be done, and put a few more people in the past can't intervene, so this is the status quo.

Actually, I think in practice, you always have a lot of opportunities to learn about the technical knowledge of your department or even other departments, depending on how you do it. But you can't build an effective structure without the hierarchy and capabilities of the underlying business.