Compare Scenarios

Migration Step 1

Both scenarios define a migration step at this stage. Social Feed Platform: triggered by 'PostgreSQL timeline read query p99 > 500ms; query plan for "'. Notification Delivery Platform: triggered by 'Notification provider latency (SendGrid, FCM) adding 200–500'.

Migration Step 2

Both scenarios define a migration step at this stage. Social Feed Platform: triggered by 'Fan-out worker queue lag during celebrity post events > 5 mi'. Notification Delivery Platform: triggered by 'Product requirement to add mobile push notifications and SMS'.

Migration Step 3

Both scenarios define a migration step at this stage. Social Feed Platform: triggered by 'Redis memory utilization approaching 80% of a single node; R'. Notification Delivery Platform: triggered by 'User complaints about notification volume increasing; spam c'.

Kafka consumer group lag for fan-out worker group growing steadily; feed propagation latency (time from post write to follower feed update) exceeding 30s p95; Redis write rate on feed keys elevated but not saturated; post activity rate normal

Tier 1: Fan-Out Worker Queue Backlog: Fan-out worker pool undersized for burst post activity or a celebrity post creating a sustained high-fan-out event. Recommended evolution: Add fan-out worker replicas; implement fan-out cost routing: route high-follower-count fan-out events to a dedicated high-cost worker pool with separate Kafka consumer group and Redis write quota; use follower count threshold (e.g., >50k followers) as the routing decision. Monitor fan-out cost per post as a first-class metric. .

Redis memory utilization > 75%; eviction rate rising; cache miss rate on feed reads increasing; cold feed read fallback queries appearing in PostgreSQL slow query log; feed read p99 > 100ms despite Redis being online

Tier 2: Redis Feed Memory Ceiling: Redis feed list storage approaching memory limit; feed items being evicted before TTL; or feed list cap set too high for available memory. Recommended evolution: Reduce feed list cap from current value toward 100–150 items; increase Redis cluster capacity or shard feed keys by user_id range across multiple Redis primaries; implement tiered feed storage: hot recent items in Redis, older items fetched from PostgreSQL on demand with explicit product UX affordance .

RabbitMQ queue depth for email channel growing > 100k messages; SendGrid 429 responses visible in delivery worker logs; email delivery p95 latency > 2 minutes; delivery worker retry thread pool saturated; dead-letter queue receiving messages from retry exhaustion despite provider being available

Tier 1: Provider Rate Limit Backlog: Delivery worker retry policy not aligned with provider rate limit reset window; workers retrying before the rate limit has reset, accumulating failed attempts. Recommended evolution: Implement provider-aware retry backoff: on 429 response, parse the Retry-After header and schedule the next retry attempt at exactly that time, not on a fixed exponential backoff schedule; add per-provider circuit breakers that open after 5 consecutive 429s and attempt a probe request at the retry-after interval; scale email consumer replicas to process the backlog faster when the rate limit window resets .

Kafka consumer lag for notification event consumers growing; notification delivery volume much higher than upstream business event volume (ratio > 5:1); RabbitMQ aggregate message rate across all channel queues elevated; one upstream event type (e.g., new_comment) accounting for disproportionate share of notification volume

Tier 2: Notification Fan-Out Amplification: Upstream event fan-out generating more notification sends per event than expected; or a notification rule misconfiguration triggering notifications for every event regardless of user preference. Recommended evolution: Audit notification fan-out ratio per upstream event type; add fan-out cost metrics (notifications_generated per upstream event) as a monitored SLA; implement notification preference filtering before fan-out: only generate delivery attempts for users with the corresponding notification type enabled; implement a notification aggregation layer that batches multiple low-priority events into digest notifications rather than individual sends .