The Architecture Decision I Regretted Only After We Went Live

 At the time, the decision made sense.

It simplified the system. Reduced coordination. Helped us ship faster. Everyone agreed it was “good enough for now.”

Production changed that perspective.

Why It Didn’t Feel Risky at First

Traffic was low. Failure was rare. The system behaved politely.

The architecture wasn’t wrong, it was untested.

I mistook early stability for correctness.

The First Signs I Ignored

Small issues appeared:

  • Manual restarts

  • Edge-case inconsistencies

  • “Rare” retries that weren’t rare anymore

Each one felt manageable. None felt urgent.

Together, they were a warning.

When Change Became Expensive

Once users depended on the system:

  • Refactors became risky

  • Downtime had real cost

  • Workarounds replaced fixes

The decision I made early quietly limited every future choice.

What That Experience Taught Me

Now, I assume:

  • Every shortcut will be stressed

  • Every assumption will be violated

  • Every design choice has a production cost

The goal isn’t perfect architecture.
It’s architecture that can survive being wrong.

Why I’m Sharing This

Most architectural mistakes only become obvious after it’s too late.

This was one of mine.

Peesh Chopra


Read moreThe Day Our Rollup Framework Broke Under Live Traffic - My Honest Story

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Journey of Peesh Chopra: Why I Build Scalable, Trust-First Blockchain Systems

When Crypto Meets Reality: The Quiet Revolution of Everyday Trust

Why Local-First Crypto Tools Matter More Than Ever