Platform Evolution
Assessment run-2026-07-27-1 · 213 of 213 repos assessed
Repos / tc-reviews-sync-service

tc-reviews-sync-service

.NET 8 background worker that polls the Reviews database for unsynchronised review shells and location reviews, enriches locations via the destination-management GraphQL API, and publishes review events to an AWS SQS queue.

98 · greenlowlooseOn-premZDD: no excuseservice

Health score

98

0 to 100 across seven weighted factors; nothing is hidden. Green is 75 and above, amber 50 to 74, red below 50. How scoring works.


Runtime currency / 25
25
Runs on supported modern .NET
Legacy transport / 15
15
No legacy WCF or SOAP surface
Test posture / 15
15
Good test coverage
Security hygiene / 15
15
No credentials found in source
Dangerous coupling / 15
15
No dangerous coupling detected
Activity / 10
8
Last commit six to twelve months ago
Deployment hygiene / 5
5
CI in place
Health over time
2026-07-24 (run-2026-07-24-1): 982026-07-27 (run-2026-07-27-1): 98
No change since 2026-07-24 (98 to 98).

Facts

Languagescsharp
Frameworks.NET Generic Host, Dapper 2.1, Mapster
Runtimes.NET 8
Tests / CIgood / CI in place
Last commit2025-12-03
OwnerOwner unknown (mapping to be curated)
DomainContent and destinations (system generated; curate in repo-owners.json to override)
Product areaShared platform
HostedOn-prem Deployed to our own machines
  • Release "\cx\tc-reviews-sync-service": QA: deployment-group phase (agents on our own machines)
  • Release "\cx\tc-reviews-sync-service": Staging: deployment-group phase (agents on our own machines)
  • Release "\cx\tc-reviews-sync-service": Production: deployment-group phase (agents on our own machines)
  • build "tc-reviews-sync-service" (build-sync-service.yml): on-prem signal "onPremiseDeploy: true" (runs on our own Docker hosts)
Releases1 release pipeline(s): \cx\tc-reviews-sync-service
Integrationsqlserver, graphql, sqs
SourceOpen in Azure DevOps

Risk flags

Each flag links to its glossary definition.

Dependencies in context

Laying out the graph…
greenamberreddata store (square, dashed link)Node size follows fan-in. Click any node to open it.

Entanglement

loose No binding mechanisms apply: this system needs no untangling work.

    Migration playbooks

    Generated from this repo's assessment data: what is feasible, what blocks it, and the steps in order. Ratings: green means actionable now, amber means sequence other work first, red means blocked, grey means not applicable.

    ZDD adoption

    No excuse

    Nothing technical is holding this repo on the three-week release. It either already deploys without downtime (AWS) or is a modern, well-tested service the automated stealth path can carry today. Modern runtime, good tests, no hosted legacy transport: the automated stealth path can carry it today.

    Dependencies and gotchas
    • 1 system(s) depend on this repo; during a rolling deploy they will talk to old and new versions at once, so responses must stay compatible
    • Serialized state or messages in flight (Redis or queues): new code must deserialize objects written by the previous version
    Steps
    1. Adopt the four-stage discipline from the ZDD engineering standard: pre-deployment compatibility, deployment, feature activation behind a flag, post-release cleanup.
    2. Make every change dual-version safe: backwards-compatible APIs (new major version for breaking wire changes), expand and contract for any schema change, and consumers tolerant of unknown fields.
    3. Audit serialized data: anything in Redis, queues or shared caches must deserialize cleanly across adjacent versions.
    4. Wrap behaviour changes in feature flags so code deploys dark and release becomes a business decision, not a deployment event.
    5. Route deployments through the Workflow Engine's automated drain, deploy, health-check, return cycle (the path proven by the first automated production run in mid-2026).
    6. Verify with area-scoped regression rather than the whole-platform cycle, and watch error rates after rollout with automated rollback on alert.

    SQL Server exit

    Blocked by a shared database

    sqlserver:Reviews is shared, so this system cannot change engine on its own: every sharer moves in convoy. Either agree the move with all sharers as one programme, or first split this system's data out behind an owned API, then follow the steps below.

    Blockers
    Steps
    1. Inventory the schema and query surface of sqlserver:Reviews: tables, stored procedures, triggers, cross-database joins and anything else engine-specific.
    2. Confirm the target: PostgreSQL (relational model; keep transactions and joins, swap the engine).
    3. Data access is not through an ORM, so port the SQL by hand: translate T-SQL constructs, replace stored procedures with application code or target-native equivalents, and add integration tests around the queries that matter first.
    4. Stand up the target alongside SQL Server, backfill with an ETL pass (pgloader or an export/import job), then dual-write or replicate until parity is proven.
    5. Move reads to the target, watch correctness and latency, then cut writes over and keep SQL Server read-only until confidence is earned.
    6. Decommission the SQL Server database and remove the connection strings and firewall paths that pointed at it.

    Containerisation

    Ready to containerise

    Modern runtime, no hosted legacy transport: this service can follow the estate's proven container path (Dockerfile, shared pipeline template, ECS via Terraform).

    Steps
    1. Add a Dockerfile and make the app read all configuration from environment variables and the secrets manager, never from machine-local files.
    2. Log to stdout and expose a health check endpoint so ECS can supervise it.
    3. Adopt the shared ci.yml pipeline template with the container parameters (awsRegion, containerAfterBuild, ecsTerraformRepo), which is exactly how the estate's existing AWS services deploy.
    4. Define the service in the Terraform repo, deploy to a non-production environment, then shift traffic and disarm the deployment-group release pipeline.

    Recommended actions

    No specific actions for this repo. It either needs only normal maintenance, or its work is covered by an estate-level action. See the full programme.

    Assessment notes

    tc-reviews-sync-service

    Purpose

    A polling sync worker for the accommodation reviews platform: SyncReviewShellsManager and SyncLocationReviewsManager fetch not-yet-synchronised review shells and location reviews from the Reviews database in batches (500 at a time, configurable wait interval), resolve destination addresses through the destination-management GraphQL client, and emit ReviewShellCreated/Updated and LocationReviewUpdated events to SQS for downstream consumers.

    Tech stack

    C# on .NET 8 with nullable reference types and implicit usings; hosted as a console ConsoleHostedService under the Generic Host. Dapper 2.1 over Microsoft.Data.SqlClient for data access, Mapster for mapping, AWSSDK.SQS 4.x, TC.ConnectionBroker 1.19 (Sql/Aws/Api) for connection resolution, and TC.OpenTelemetry + Serilog for telemetry. Analysers (NetAnalyzers, Sonar, SecurityCodeScan) are enforced via Directory.Build.props.

    Deployment

    prod_application with 1 release: release pipeline \cx\tc-reviews-sync-service from YAML build build-sync-service.yml, which uses the shared azure-pipelines-templates CI job (dotnet SDK 8.x, Linux agents, Docker Hub registry, image aws-reviews-sync-service). Runs as a Docker container; per-environment appsettings for qa/staging/training/production.

    Dependencies

    Internal: TC.ConnectionBroker.* (tc-connectionbroker) and TC.Destination.Management.GraphQL.Client (phenix-destination-management). External: AWS SQS via connection-broker target Public_ReviewsMessagingSqs. No secrets in source — all connections resolved through the broker.

    Data stores

    SQL Server Reviews database (connection-broker target Reviews) — the same database owned by phenix-reviews, so the two repos are coupled through shared tables (NotSynchronisedReviewShell, NotSynchronisedLocationReview, ratings).

    Integration points

    SQL polling inbound; GraphQL calls to destination-management; SQS event publishing outbound. No inbound API surface.

    Code health

    Four xunit test projects (application managers, messaging/SQS facade, GraphQL client, mapping configuration) with NSubstitute and FluentAssertions — good coverage for its size. Actively maintained (last commit 2025-12-03). README is the untouched Azure DevOps boilerplate.

    Modernisation risks

    Low: modern .NET 8, YAML CI, containerised, well-tested. Main watch items are the shared Reviews database coupling with phenix-reviews (schema changes must be coordinated) and polling-based sync, which could eventually move to change-data-capture or messaging if volume grows.