Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

10
  • 1
    This doesn’t sound like a typical business domain. Why do you think the DDD tactical patterns are a good fit for this problem space? Commented Dec 11, 2023 at 19:49
  • That said, it’s advised to always design at least two different models to solve the same problem. That forces you to think outside of the box and could lead to a better model than what might seem most logical at first. Commented Dec 11, 2023 at 19:54
  • 2
    How do you intend to enforce a unique name for all nodes of a graph as a business rule, while being unwilling to look at all of the nodes (and therefore their names) when creating a new node? That's not a rhetorical question. Commented Dec 12, 2023 at 4:00
  • 2
    Does this answer your question? How to handle business rules that are "uniqueness" constraints? Commented Dec 14, 2023 at 9:44
  • 3
    I meant two (or more) different domain models. Don’t take for granted that Graph should be the aggregate root. Explore other ways to tackle the business problems. Btw. what you’re facing here is what Khorikov calls the DDD trilemma in his blog, it might be useful to read: enterprisecraftsmanship.com/posts/… Commented Dec 18, 2023 at 23:11