System Design Tradeoffs

System Design Tradeoffs

Published on
Authors

In the world of software engineering and system design, we constantly face decisions that require balancing different qualities and behaviors in our systems. These decisions, known as design tradeoffs, are essential in shaping the architecture, scalability, reliability, and performance of modern applications.

This post explores the most important system design tradeoffs — what they mean, how they impact system behavior, and when you must make them vs. when you can avoid them.

🎯 What Are Design Tradeoffs?

Design tradeoffs are decisions made during system architecture where improving one aspect of the system may come at the cost of another. Think of it like adjusting a see-saw: lift one side, and the other dips. In large, distributed, or highly-scalable systems, no solution is perfect — and making the right tradeoff is key to building systems that meet your specific goals.

👉 The real challenge? Knowing when a tradeoff is worth it, and when it isn’t.

🔄 Key System Design Tradeoffs

Let’s break these down one by one — I’ll also mention when it’s necessary to trade, and when it’s avoidable.

1️⃣ Vertical vs Horizontal Scaling

  • Vertical Scaling (Scale Up): Add more resources (CPU, RAM) to a single machine.
  • Horizontal Scaling (Scale Out): Add more machines to distribute the load.

When to trade:

  • Vertical scaling works well for simpler, monolithic apps. But for high availability and elasticity, horizontal scaling is essential.
  • Avoid the tradeoff early — start vertically, scale horizontally as demand grows.

2️⃣ SQL vs NoSQL Databases

  • SQL: Structured, relational, supports complex queries and ACID guarantees.
  • NoSQL: Flexible schema, highly scalable, suited for large unstructured or semi-structured data.

When to trade:

  • Use SQL for financial systems, transactional apps.
  • Choose NoSQL for content platforms, IoT, or large-scale distributed apps.
  • Avoid switching to NoSQL unless scalability/availability demands exceed relational database limits.

3️⃣ Batch vs Stream Processing

  • Batch: Processes large chunks of data periodically.
  • Stream: Processes data in real-time as it arrives.

When to trade:

  • Stream for real-time systems (chat apps, fraud detection).
  • Batch for reporting, analytics.
  • Avoid stream processing if real-time performance isn’t business-critical — it adds cost and complexity.

4️⃣ Normalization vs Denormalization

  • Normalization: Reduces redundancy by splitting data into related tables.
  • Denormalization: Combines data for faster reads at the cost of redundancy.

When to trade:

  • Normalize for transactional consistency.
  • Denormalize for fast reads in high-traffic, read-heavy systems.
  • Avoid premature denormalization — it adds maintenance overhead and risks data anomalies.

5️⃣ Consistency vs Availability (CAP Theorem)

  • In distributed systems, it’s impossible to guarantee Consistency, Availability, and Partition Tolerance all at the same time.
    • CP (Consistency + Partition Tolerance) sacrifices availability.
    • AP (Availability + Partition Tolerance) sacrifices consistency.

When to trade:

  • Choose consistency for financial, order management, or sensitive systems.
  • Favor availability for social networks, content delivery, or user feeds.
  • Avoid leaning too hard on consistency if temporary inconsistencies won’t hurt your business.

6️⃣ Strong vs Eventual Consistency

  • Strong: All nodes reflect the same data instantly.
  • Eventual: Data may be inconsistent temporarily but eventually consistent.

When to trade:

  • Use strong consistency for critical transactions.
  • Eventual consistency for email delivery, notifications.
  • Avoid strong consistency across distributed systems if high availability is essential.

7️⃣ REST vs GraphQL

  • REST: Fixed endpoints, often requires multiple calls.
  • GraphQL: Flexible, query what you need in a single call.

When to trade:

  • REST for simple, mature APIs with predictable data.
  • GraphQL for client-driven UIs or mobile apps needing tailored data.
  • Avoid GraphQL if security, caching, and tooling aren’t mature in your stack.

8️⃣ Stateful vs Stateless

  • Stateful: Server remembers client context.
  • Stateless: Every request is independent.

When to trade:

  • Stateful for game servers, video streams.
  • Stateless for APIs, web apps, microservices.
  • Avoid statefulness if horizontal scaling and reliability are priorities.

9️⃣ Read-Through vs Write-Through Caching

  • Read-Through: Cache is checked before the database.
  • Write-Through: Updates go to the cache first, then to the database.

When to trade:

  • Read-Through for read-heavy, cacheable data.
  • Write-Through for write-heavy, consistency-critical applications.
  • Avoid write-through unless data freshness is more important than write performance.

🔟 Synchronous vs Asynchronous Processing

  • Synchronous: Request waits for processing to complete.
  • Asynchronous: Request returns immediately; processing happens in background.

When to trade:

  • Sync for immediate feedback systems (logins, payments).
  • Async for notifications, uploads, or long-running jobs.
  • Avoid unnecessary async processing — it complicates error handling and delivery guarantees.

🧲 Pull vs Push Architectures

  • Pull: Clients request data as needed.
  • Push: Server proactively sends updates.

When to trade:

  • Push for real-time apps (chat, trading).
  • Pull for dashboards, analytics.
  • Avoid push unless low latency and immediacy are required.

📈 Throughput vs Latency

  • Throughput: How much data you process over time.
  • Latency: Time for a single transaction.

When to trade:

  • Batch processing for throughput.
  • Real-time systems for low latency.
  • Avoid throughput-first designs in latency-critical scenarios (like user-facing apps).

📉 Latency vs Accuracy

  • Fast responses vs. most accurate responses.

When to trade:

  • Fast, approximate for recommendations, alerts.
  • Accurate for financial reports, legal documents.
  • Avoid delaying critical user interactions just for slightly better precision.

✅ When Is It Must to Make a Tradeoff?

Tradeoffs are must-make decisions when:

  • System constraints force you to choose (e.g., network partitions in distributed systems).
  • The business demands it (e.g., real-time trading).
  • Performance, cost, and scale targets conflict.

When to avoid tradeoffs:

  • If both qualities can be achieved easily at your current scale.
  • If the complexity introduced by the tradeoff outweighs its benefits.
  • If premature optimization risks future flexibility.

📝 Conclusion

System design is a careful balancing act. Every architectural decision has consequences — what you gain in one area, you may sacrifice in another. The key is understanding the tradeoffs and choosing the ones that align with your system’s unique requirements and growth patterns.

You don’t always need to make these tradeoffs. Sometimes, simplicity wins. But when it doesn’t, having clarity on why you’re making a tradeoff is what separates great engineers from average ones.

Cheers,

Sim