W13 - Survey of Architecture Choices

This week I reviewed several architectural solutions within the broad front-end domain to preliminarily evaluate options for the merchant platform. I have currently collected the following three categories.

Page-level micro-frontend based on open-source frameworks. Built using micro-frontend frameworks such as qiankun and garage. Representative projects are mostly M-side applications, such as the ecosystem's CMM and the Zhugeng platform.

Component-level micro-frontend based on EDC. The representative example is the ecosystem finance MFC. Its stability and availability have been partially validated by co-branded C-end cards, and it is in a platform-style transformation stage for external delivery. The integration and migration costs remain to be determined.

Node-based multi-page application architecture. The representative project is C Wealth's CORPS..This addresses the splitting and autonomy of business processes. The merchant platform faces more issues with horizontal business coupling; optimizing the most vertical processes is not the primary pain point.

Considering our situation—limited manpower and business that cannot be stopped—the prioritization of selection criteria from highest to lowest value should be: cost, stability, and performance. Cost has two aspects: low switching cost for existing projects, and low maintenance and team comprehension cost. Stability here emphasizes the architecture’s own reliability; it should at least match the current stability of the merchant platform. After architectural changes, because each subservice must achieve independent autonomy, the overall stability of project iterations should improve significantly. Performance refers to the ceiling introduced by the new architecture; I think some trade-offs are acceptable. First, current service performance is not very high and has significant room for improvement. Second, B2B scenarios tolerate performance constraints more than C2C scenarios.