Component diagrams shift our perspective from individual object instances to system architecture, showing how major building blocks interact to form complete, scalable applications. While class diagrams focus on detailed object relationships, Component diagrams zoom out to reveal the big picture—how modules, services, and subsystems collaborate to deliver business value.
In this continuation of our UML series, we’ll explore system architecture design, dependency management, and patterns that enable systems to evolve gracefully with changing requirements.
What Are Component Diagrams?
Component diagrams show the organization and dependencies among software components. They illustrate the static view of a system’s architecture, focusing on component interfaces, dependencies, and the overall structural organization. Components represent modular parts of a system that encapsulate behavior and can be independently developed, tested, and deployed.
Types of Components
Modern software systems use various types of components:
- Microservices: Independent, deployable business capabilities
- Libraries/Frameworks: Reusable code packages with specific functionality
- Modules: Logical groupings of related classes and functionality
- Subsystems: Major functional areas of large applications
Microservices Architecture Example
Let’s model a modern e-commerce platform using microservices architecture:
flowchart TB
subgraph Client["Client Applications"]
A["Web App
React + TypeScript"]
B["Mobile App
React Native"]
C["Admin Dashboard
Vue.js"]
end
subgraph Gateway["API Gateway Layer"]
D["API Gateway
Kong + Rate Limiting"]
end
subgraph Core["Core Business Services"]
E["User Service
Node.js + Express"]
F["Product Service
Java Spring Boot"]
G["Order Service
Python FastAPI"]
H["Payment Service
Go + Gin"]
I["Inventory Service
.NET Core"]
J["Notification Service
Node.js + Bull"]
end
subgraph Data["Data Layer"]
K[("User DB
PostgreSQL")]
L[("Product DB
MongoDB")]
M[("Order DB
PostgreSQL")]
N[("Cache
Redis")]
O["Message Queue
RabbitMQ"]
end
subgraph External["External Services"]
P["Payment Gateway
Stripe API"]
Q["Email Service
SendGrid"]
R["CDN
CloudFlare"]
end
A --> D
B --> D
C --> D
D --> E
D --> F
D --> G
D --> H
D --> I
D --> J
E --> K
F --> L
G --> M
I --> N
G --> O
J --> O
H -.-> P
J -.-> Q
F -.-> RInterface-Based Component Design
Component diagrams excel at showing interfaces—the contracts between components. This promotes loose coupling and makes systems more maintainable:
flowchart LR
subgraph Interfaces["Component Interface Design"]
A["Order Processing
Component"] --> B[IPaymentProcessor]
A --> C[IInventoryService]
A --> D[INotificationService]
E["Stripe Payment
Component"] -.-> B
F["PayPal Payment
Component"] -.-> B
G["Inventory Service
Component"] -.-> C
H["Email Service
Component"] -.-> D
I["SMS Service
Component"] -.-> D
J["Push Notification
Component"] -.-> D
endPackage Diagrams: Organizing Large Systems
Package diagrams show how components and classes are organized into logical groups. They’re essential for managing dependencies in large codebases:
flowchart TB
subgraph Presentation["Presentation Layer"]
A["com.ecommerce.web"]
B["com.ecommerce.api"]
C["com.ecommerce.dto"]
end
subgraph Business["Business Layer"]
D["com.ecommerce.service"]
E["com.ecommerce.domain"]
F["com.ecommerce.validation"]
end
subgraph DataLayer["Data Layer"]
G["com.ecommerce.repository"]
H["com.ecommerce.entity"]
I["com.ecommerce.config"]
end
subgraph Integration["External Integration"]
J["com.ecommerce.payment"]
K["com.ecommerce.notification"]
L["com.ecommerce.storage"]
end
A --> C
B --> C
A --> D
B --> D
D --> E
D --> F
D --> G
G --> H
G --> I
D --> J
D --> K
D --> LDependency Management Patterns
Component diagrams help identify and manage dependencies. The dependency inversion principle suggests that high-level modules shouldn’t depend on low-level modules:
flowchart TB
subgraph Good["Good Dependency Structure"]
A["Application Core"]
B["Infrastructure"]
C["Interfaces"]
A --> C
B --> C
B -.-> A
end
subgraph Poor["Poor Structure (Avoid)"]
D["Business Logic"]
E["Database Access"]
F["External APIs"]
D --> E
D --> F
endLayered Architecture Pattern
The layered architecture pattern organizes components into horizontal layers, each with specific responsibilities:
flowchart TB
subgraph PresentationLayer["Presentation Layer"]
A["Web Controllers"]
B["API Controllers"]
C["View Components"]
end
subgraph ApplicationLayer["Application Layer"]
D["Application Services"]
E["Data Transfer Objects"]
F["Request Handlers"]
end
subgraph DomainLayer["Domain Layer"]
G["Domain Services"]
H["Domain Models"]
I["Business Rules"]
end
subgraph InfrastructureLayer["Infrastructure Layer"]
J["Repositories"]
K["External Service Clients"]
L["Database Context"]
end
A --> D
B --> D
C --> D
D --> G
D --> E
E --> F
G --> H
G --> I
D --> J
D --> K
J --> LEvent-Driven Architecture
Event-driven architectures use events to enable loose coupling between components:
flowchart TB
subgraph EventDriven["Event-Driven E-commerce Architecture"]
A["Order Service"] --> B["Event Bus
Apache Kafka"]
C["Inventory Service"] --> B
D["Payment Service"] --> B
E["Notification Service"] --> B
F["Analytics Service"] --> B
G["Audit Service"] --> B
B --> H["Order Created"]
B --> I["Payment Processed"]
B --> J["Order Shipped"]
B --> K["Inventory Updated"]
B --> L["User Registered"]
endComponent Implementation Strategies
Monolithic to Microservices Evolution
Component diagrams can show how systems evolve from monoliths to microservices:
flowchart LR
subgraph Monolith["Monolithic Application"]
A["E-commerce Monolith
All features in one deployment"]
end
subgraph Microservices["Microservices Architecture"]
B["User Service"]
C["Product Service"]
D["Order Service"]
E["Payment Service"]
F["Inventory Service"]
end
A -.-> B
A -.-> C
A -.-> D
A -.-> E
A -.-> FCode Organization Patterns
Component diagrams translate directly to project structure. Here’s how a Java Spring Boot project organizes components:
src/main/java/com/ecommerce/
├── user/ # User Management Component
│ ├── UserService.java
│ ├── UserController.java
│ ├── UserRepository.java
│ └── dto/UserDTO.java
├── order/ # Order Processing Component
│ ├── OrderService.java
│ ├── OrderController.java
│ ├── OrderRepository.java
│ └── dto/OrderDTO.java
├── payment/ # Payment Component
│ ├── PaymentService.java
│ ├── PaymentGateway.java
│ └── PaymentController.java
├── inventory/ # Inventory Component
│ ├── InventoryService.java
│ ├── StockRepository.java
│ └── InventoryController.java
└── shared/ # Shared Components
├── config/SecurityConfig.java
├── exception/GlobalExceptionHandler.java
└── util/ValidationUtils.javaComponent Lifecycle and Deployment
Understanding component lifecycles is crucial for system reliability:
flowchart LR
A[Development] --> B[Testing]
B --> C[Staging]
C --> D[Production]
D --> E[Maintenance]
E --> F[Deprecated]
B --> A
C --> B
D --> C
E --> DBest Practices for Component Design
Component Guidelines
- High Cohesion: Group related functionality together
- Loose Coupling: Minimize dependencies between components
- Clear Interfaces: Define explicit contracts between components
- Single Responsibility: Each component should have one primary purpose
Anti-Patterns to Avoid
- God Components: Components that handle too many responsibilities
- Circular Dependencies: Components that depend on each other
- Chatty Interfaces: Too many fine-grained method calls
- Shared Databases: Multiple components accessing the same database
Conclusion
Component diagrams provide the architectural foundation for building systems that scale. By clearly defining component boundaries, interfaces, and dependencies, we create systems that are maintainable, testable, and adaptable to changing business needs.
Next, we’ll explore Use Case Diagrams—the bridge between business requirements and technical design. We’ll see how to capture user needs and translate them into system requirements that drive our component architecture.
One thought on “UML Component Diagrams: System Architecture Design (Part 3B)”
Comments are closed.