What are the common integration anti-patterns and how to avoid them?

Integration is the process of connecting different systems, applications, and data sources to enable information exchange and collaboration. However, integration can also introduce complexity, risks, and challenges that can affect the performance, reliability, and security of the integrated systems. In this article, we will explore some of the common integration anti-patterns, which are bad practices that can lead to integration problems, and how to avoid them.

1 Point-to-point integration

Point-to-point integration is when two systems communicate directly with each other, without using any intermediary or standard protocol. This approach can seem simple and fast, but it can also create a tightly coupled and brittle integration that is hard to maintain, scale, and modify. For example, if one system changes its interface or data format, all the other systems that depend on it have to change as well, or the integration will break. To avoid this anti-pattern, use an integration platform or a service bus that can decouple the systems and provide a common interface, protocol, and message format.

Add your perspective

Nadeem Malik

Enterprise Architect - providing enterprise-wide insights, promoting standardization, reducing costs, mitigating risk, increasing agility, realizing strategies, and driving innovation.
Report contribution
Point-to-point can be a spaghetti nightmare! Instead of direct connections, think "hub and spoke" with an integration layer. It's like hosting a dinner party - you don't want guests shouting across the table, but passing dishes through a central point. Use service buses or APIs to decouple systems & make changes easier down the road.

Like
Soma Dey

Associate Manager at Accenture Solutions
Report contribution
This is good. One example can be the data publish to data lake from upstream system and downstream systems can subscribe to use the data from lake.

Like

Load more contributions

2 Big bang integration

Big bang integration is when all the systems are integrated at once, without any incremental testing or verification. This approach can seem efficient and convenient, but it can also create a high-risk and unpredictable integration that is prone to errors, failures, and delays. For example, if one system has a bug or a compatibility issue, it can affect the whole integration and require a lot of debugging and troubleshooting. To avoid this anti-pattern, use an iterative and incremental integration approach that can test and verify each system and component separately, and then integrate them gradually and systematically.

Add your perspective

Nadeem Malik

Enterprise Architect - providing enterprise-wide insights, promoting standardization, reducing costs, mitigating risk, increasing agility, realizing strategies, and driving innovation.
(edited)
Report contribution
The "big bang" approach is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube blindfolded - risky & unpredictable! Break it down into manageable chunks instead. Think iterative & incremental, like building Lego - start with a solid foundation & add pieces gradually. Test each connection thoroughly before moving on. Rome wasn't integrated in a day!

Like

3 Hard-coded integration

Hard-coded integration is when the integration logic and configuration are embedded in the code of the systems or the integration platform. This approach can seem flexible and customizable, but it can also create a rigid and inflexible integration that is difficult to change, reuse, and manage. For example, if the integration requirements or rules change, the code has to be modified and redeployed, which can introduce errors and downtime. To avoid this anti-pattern, use an externalized and declarative integration approach that can separate the integration logic and configuration from the code, and store them in a configuration file or a database.

Add your perspective

Nadeem Malik

Enterprise Architect - providing enterprise-wide insights, promoting standardization, reducing costs, mitigating risk, increasing agility, realizing strategies, and driving innovation.
Report contribution
Hard-coding integration logic is like cementing your furniture to the floor - inflexible & a pain to change! Externalize configs & use declarative approaches instead. It's more like using modular furniture - easy to rearrange as needs evolve. Store integration rules in config files or databases for simpler updates & reuse.

Like

4 Data dumping integration

Data dumping integration is when the systems exchange large amounts of data without any filtering, validation, or transformation. This approach can seem simple and comprehensive, but it can also create a wasteful and inefficient integration that consumes a lot of resources, bandwidth, and storage. For example, if the systems send or receive data that they do not need or cannot process, they will waste time and effort to handle or discard them. To avoid this anti-pattern, use a selective and intelligent integration approach that can filter, validate, and transform the data according to the needs and capabilities of the systems.

Add your perspective

5 Monolithic integration

Monolithic integration is when the integration platform or the service bus is deployed as a single and centralized unit that handles all the integration tasks and flows. This approach can seem consistent and manageable, but it can also create a vulnerable and unstable integration that suffers from performance bottlenecks, single points of failure, and scalability issues. For example, if the integration platform or the service bus crashes or slows down, it can affect the entire integration and disrupt the communication and collaboration of the systems. To avoid this anti-pattern, use a distributed and modular integration approach that can deploy the integration platform or the service bus as multiple and independent units that can handle different integration tasks and flows.

Add your perspective

Nadeem Malik

Enterprise Architect - providing enterprise-wide insights, promoting standardization, reducing costs, mitigating risk, increasing agility, realizing strategies, and driving innovation.
Report contribution
Monolithic integration is a ticking time bomb. It's like putting all your eggs in one basket - risky! Opt for a distributed, modular approach instead. Deploy integration components as independent units handling different tasks & flows. This way, if one part hiccups, the whole system doesn't come crashing down. Remember, resilience is key!

Like

6 Ad hoc integration

Ad hoc integration is when the integration is done without any planning, design, or documentation. This approach can seem quick and easy, but it can also create a chaotic and inconsistent integration that lacks standards, best practices, and governance. For example, if the integration is done by different developers or teams without any coordination or communication, it can result in duplication, inconsistency, and confusion. To avoid this anti-pattern, use a structured and documented integration approach that can follow a clear and coherent integration strategy, architecture, and framework.

Add your perspective

Nadeem Malik

Enterprise Architect - providing enterprise-wide insights, promoting standardization, reducing costs, mitigating risk, increasing agility, realizing strategies, and driving innovation.
Report contribution
Ad hoc integration is like building a house without blueprints - chaos waiting to happen! Embrace a structured, documented approach with clear strategies & frameworks. It's like having a well-organized toolbox - you'll know exactly what you need & where to find it. Don't let your integration strategy become a game of architectural Jenga!

Like

7 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?

Add your perspective

Nadeem Malik

Enterprise Architect - providing enterprise-wide insights, promoting standardization, reducing costs, mitigating risk, increasing agility, realizing strategies, and driving innovation.
Report contribution
As an Enterprise Architect, I've seen these anti-patterns cause major headaches time & time again. But here's the thing - there's no one-size-fits-all solution. Sometimes, a quick point-to-point integration might be the right call for a proof-of-concept. The key is understanding the trade-offs & long-term implications of each approach. Always keep the big picture in mind, but don't be afraid to get your hands dirty with the details. And remember, communication is crucial - make sure all stakeholders are on the same page to avoid integration nightmares down the road!

Like

What are the common integration anti-patterns and how to avoid them?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1 Point-to-point integration

2 Big bang integration

3 Hard-coded integration

4 Data dumping integration

5 Monolithic integration

6 Ad hoc integration

7 Here’s what else to consider

Technical Architecture

Rate this article

Thanks for your feedback

More articles on Technical Architecture

More relevant reading