[HN Gopher] Elements of System Design
___________________________________________________________________
Elements of System Design
Author : qianli_cs
Score : 59 points
Date : 2025-07-29 17:44 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| edomyrots wrote:
| Unlike the real periodic table, here you can add new elements
| also
| jarulraj wrote:
| Exactly. It is intentionally open-ended: new "principles" can
| emerge, split, or retire as the taxonomy evolves. This is just
| version 1. The grid is a visual index and the fun part is
| mappin systems to "molecules" in different domains like OS,
| databases, computer architecture, distributed systems,
| programming languages, networking, and more..
| culi wrote:
| New elements can also be added to the periodic table of
| elements. Nh, Mc, Ts, and Og were all added in 2016 and
| discovered within the past 2ish decades
| iamwil wrote:
| My pet peeve on the internet (and the only one I consistently
| rant about) is "Periodic Table of X" The data is often visualized
| to look like the Periodic Table of Elements. At least this one
| doesn't make that mistake!
|
| But then, are the system design principles periodic in some way?
| Does adding Y to one of the principles turn it into another? And
| if you add enough Ys, does it turn back into the same group
| again? Here, I find it's a resounding no.
|
| Better to call it a Taxonomy of System Design instead.
|
| /rant
| dondraper36 wrote:
| I know it's a rant, but my explanation for the popularity of
| such visualization is their familiarity. I mean, I'd also
| prefer a more accurate use of references to science, but I
| guess you will agree that "A periodic table of X" sounds pretty
| cool and makes you read the article :)
| cwmoore wrote:
| Ok, now show me a molecule. The Periodic Table of Elements is
| a deep reference object, not a graphic design template.
| metalliqaz wrote:
| it's both
|
| just by it's ubiquity and success it has become a template
| for graphical design
| peteforde wrote:
| The periodicity reflects the allowed solutions to the
| Schrodinger equation for electrons in atoms. It is not
| some branding teams' genius design innovation.
|
| Ironically, you are in a superstate between "can" and
| "should".
| mbb70 wrote:
| It is _also_ a colorful collection of boxes that a
| billion+ people could instantly identify.
|
| Cashing in on that global cultural awareness is just the
| kind of innovation a genius branding team needs.
|
| It does annoy me when 'Periodic Tables of X' are just
| lists of color coded boxes, but I get it.
| peteforde wrote:
| The problem - and it is a problem - is that this is not a
| good thing.
|
| A billion+ people instantly identify police, but dressing
| like a cop is a crime.
| jarulraj wrote:
| Author here, great question :) If principles are the
| elements, we can think of each system as a "molecule" with
| some imagination. For example, an SQL database system has
| many principles:
|
| 1. Abstraction Lifting (Al) + Policy/Mechanism Separation
| (Pm): SQL states high-level intent with precise semantics,
| and logical operators are decoupled from physical
| operators.
|
| 2. Equivalence-based Planning (Ep) + Invariant-Guided
| Transformation (Ig): We apply algebraic rewrites that
| preserve semantics (e.g., join reordering, predicate
| pushdown) under stated invariants.
|
| 3. Cost-based Planning (Cm): We choose concrete physical
| operators and join orders using a cost model and so on..
| jrm4 wrote:
| Right, I'm thinking --- if you put it on a grid are there
| properties on rows? or columns?
|
| If not, eeehhh
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| I wouldn't even call it a taxonomy. "A list organized into
| sections".
|
| But that sounds _far_ less grand...
| jarulraj wrote:
| Yes :)
| jarulraj wrote:
| Totally fair.. I am not claiming periodicity here :) I just
| wanted to use the "periodic table" as a visual metaphor. The
| goal is to outline a mostly orthogonal set of system design
| principles and illustrate cross-domain connections to students
| so that it is easier to compare trade-offs and discuss designs
| more precisely.
| iamwil wrote:
| You keep doing you. It's a losing battle on my end. There
| will still be more Periodic Table of X on the internet after
| I've stopped yelling at clouds.
| jarulraj wrote:
| :)
| abtinf wrote:
| > I am not claiming periodicity here
|
| > *Periodic* Table of System Design Principles
|
| Seems contradictory.
| cocodill wrote:
| Somehow the TABLE is missing.
| righthand wrote:
| More like list of system design principles stylized as periodic
| table of elements icons.
| rossant wrote:
| There is one now in the table of contents.
| jarulraj wrote:
| I added it now :)
| douglee650 wrote:
| Forked
| pavlov wrote:
| A periodic table with no table and no periodicity.
|
| Wouldn't "Elements of System Design" have worked?
| jarulraj wrote:
| Yes, I just borrowed the periodic table metaphor. "Elements of
| System Design" is a better name.
| jarulraj wrote:
| Author here, appreciate the share :) I was not expecting this to
| get so much attention.
|
| To clarify: this is indeed just a taxonomy of classic system-
| design principles. The periodic-table styling is a familiar
| metaphor; there is no claim that principles repeat periodically.
| The goal was to outline a mostly orthogonal set of design
| principles and highlight cross-domain connections across computer
| systems so it is easier to discuss designs precisely. Thanks for
| all the thoughtful feedback!
| peteforde wrote:
| I came to say what others beat me to: this is not a periodic
| table, and calling it such is a legitimate disservice. It
| taints whatever value your content might hold because if it's
| presented as something that it's not, why should anyone trust
| it?
|
| I strongly urge you to rename the project and most definitely
| update the body content of your README.md.
|
| The best time was before you git pushed; the second best time
| is right now.
| jarulraj wrote:
| Agreed, I just updated it to "Elements of System Design".
| dang wrote:
| Ok, we'll put that in the title above as well. Thanks!
| Liftyee wrote:
| As more of an embedded and electronics engineer, I've mentally
| toyed with extending these software principles into broader
| engineering, and some of them work decently. However, there is
| questionable value in making things like bridges modular. Either
| way, I did need a system design almanac like this one.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-07-29 23:00 UTC)