Generated banner for Cloud Solution Architect
Generated logo for Cloud Solution Architect

Cloud Solution Architect

MicrosoftOfficialPublished by Microsoft

  • Skill
  • Guidelines
  • Software development
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

Transform the agent into a Cloud Solution Architect following Azure Architecture Center best practices. Use when designing cloud architectures, reviewing system designs, selecting architecture styles, applying cloud design patterns, making technology choices, or conducting Well-Architected Framework reviews.
— the description by Microsoft

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

This skill configures an AI agent to act as a Cloud Solution Architect, providing structured guidance based on the Azure Architecture Center. It enables the agent to assist with designing production-grade cloud systems, selecting appropriate architecture styles, applying proven design patterns, and conducting systematic reviews against the Well-Architected Framework (WAF). The agent is equipped with knowledge of 10 core design principles, 44 cloud design patterns, and decision frameworks for technology selection, ensuring that architectural decisions are well-reasoned and aligned with industry-standard best practices.

What it does

  • Provides guidance on selecting architecture styles like N-tier, Microservices, and Event-driven.
  • Maps 44 cloud design patterns to WAF pillars for reliability, security, and performance.
  • Offers a decision framework for choosing compute, storage, data, and messaging technologies.
  • Conducts systematic architecture reviews using the Well-Architected Framework.
  • Identifies performance antipatterns and suggests remediation strategies.
  • Supports the creation of Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) for project documentation.

When to use it

  • When designing a new cloud-based application or system architecture.
  • When reviewing an existing system design for potential improvements or bottlenecks.
  • When evaluating technology choices for compute, data, or messaging services.
  • When performing a Well-Architected Framework review to ensure system quality.
  • When troubleshooting performance issues caused by common cloud antipatterns.

Advantages

  • Ensures architectural consistency by following official Azure best practices.
  • Facilitates informed decision-making through structured tradeoff analysis.
  • Promotes the use of resilient, scalable, and cost-effective design patterns.
  • Standardizes the documentation of architectural decisions via ADR templates.
  • Helps align technical choices with specific business requirements and SLAs.

Usage examples

“I am designing a high-traffic e-commerce platform. Which architecture style should I choose?”
The agent will compare styles like Microservices versus N-tier based on your team's autonomy, domain complexity, and scaling needs, recommending the best fit.
“Our application is experiencing performance issues under load. Can you help me identify potential antipatterns?”
The agent will review your current design against known performance antipatterns like 'Busy Database' or 'Chatty I/O' and suggest specific fixes.
“Help me conduct a Well-Architected Framework review for my current Azure deployment.”
The agent will guide you through a systematic assessment of your architecture across the five WAF pillars, identifying risks and improvement opportunities.
“We need to choose a messaging service for our event-driven system. What are the options?”
The agent will present a decision framework comparing Service Bus, Event Hubs, and Event Grid based on your specific throughput and ordering requirements.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/microsoft/cloud-solution-architect/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip cloud-solution-architect.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Microsoft

Cloud Solution Architect

Overview

Design well-architected, production-grade cloud systems following Azure Architecture Center best practices. This skill provides:

  • 10 design principles for Azure applications

  • 6 architecture styles with selection guidance

  • 44 cloud design patterns mapped to WAF pillars

  • Technology choice frameworks for compute, storage, data, messaging

  • Performance antipatterns to avoid

  • Architecture review workflow for systematic design validation


Ten Design Principles for Azure Applications

#PrincipleKey Tactics
1Design for self-healingRetry with backoff, circuit breaker, bulkhead isolation, health endpoint monitoring, graceful degradation
2Make all things redundantEliminate single points of failure, use availability zones, deploy multi-region, replicate data
3Minimize coordinationDecouple services, use async messaging, embrace eventual consistency, use domain events
4Design to scale outHorizontal scaling, autoscaling rules, stateless services, avoid session stickiness, partition workloads
5Partition around limitsData partitioning (shard/hash/range), respect compute & network limits, use CDNs for static content
6Design for operationsStructured logging, distributed tracing, metrics & dashboards, runbook automation, infrastructure as code
7Use managed servicesPrefer PaaS over IaaS, reduce operational burden, leverage built-in HA/DR/scaling
8Use an identity serviceMicrosoft Entra ID, managed identity, RBAC, avoid storing credentials, zero-trust principles
9Design for evolutionLoose coupling, versioned APIs, backward compatibility, async messaging for integration, feature flags
10Build for business needsDefine SLAs/SLOs, establish RTO/RPO targets, domain-driven design, cost modeling, composite SLAs

Architecture Styles

StyleDescriptionWhen to UseKey Services
N-tierHorizontal layers (presentation, business, data)Traditional enterprise apps, lift-and-shiftApp Service, SQL Database, VNets
Web-Queue-WorkerWeb frontend → message queue → backend workerModerate-complexity apps with long-running tasksApp Service, Service Bus, Functions
MicroservicesSmall autonomous services, bounded contexts, independent deployComplex domains, independent team scalingAKS, Container Apps, API Management
Event-drivenPub/sub model, event producers/consumersReal-time processing, IoT, reactive systemsEvent Hubs, Event Grid, Functions
Big dataBatch + stream processing pipelineAnalytics, ML pipelines, large-scale dataSynapse, Data Factory, Databricks
Big computeHPC, parallel processingSimulations, modeling, rendering, genomicsBatch, CycleCloud, HPC VMs
Selection Criteria
  • Domain complexity → Microservices (high), N-tier (low-medium)

  • Team autonomy → Microservices (independent teams), N-tier (single team)

  • Data volume → Big data (TB+), others (GB)

  • Latency requirements → Event-driven (real-time), Web-Queue-Worker (tolerant)


Cloud Design Patterns

44 patterns organized by primary concern. WAF pillar mapping: R=Reliability, S=Security, CO=Cost Optimization, OE=Operational Excellence, PE=Performance Efficiency.

Messaging & Communication
PatternSummaryPillars
Asynchronous Request-ReplyDecouple request/response with polling or callbacksR, PE
Claim CheckSplit large messages; store payload separately, pass referenceR, PE
ChoreographyServices coordinate via events without central orchestratorR, OE
Competing ConsumersMultiple consumers process messages from shared queue concurrentlyR, PE
Messaging BridgeConnect incompatible messaging systemsR, OE
Pipes and FiltersDecompose complex processing into reusable filter stagesR, OE
Priority QueuePrioritize requests so higher-priority work is processed firstR, PE
Publisher/SubscriberDecouple senders from receivers via topics/subscriptionsR, PE
Queue-Based Load LevelingBuffer requests with a queue to smooth intermittent loadsR, PE
Sequential ConvoyProcess related messages in order while allowing parallel groupsR, PE
Reliability & Resilience
PatternSummaryPillars
BulkheadIsolate resources per workload to prevent cascading failureR
Circuit BreakerStop calling a failing service; fail fast to protect resourcesR
Compensating TransactionUndo previously committed steps when a later step failsR
Health Endpoint MonitoringExpose health checks for load balancers and orchestratorsR, OE
Leader ElectionCoordinate distributed instances by electing a leaderR
RetryHandle transient faults by retrying with exponential backoffR
SagaManage data consistency across microservices with compensating transactionsR
Scheduler Agent SupervisorCoordinate distributed actions with retry and failure handlingR
Data Management
PatternSummaryPillars
Cache-AsideLoad data on demand into cache from data storePE
CQRSSeparate read and write models for independent scalingPE, R
Event SourcingStore state as append-only sequence of domain eventsR, OE
Index TableCreate indexes over frequently queried fields in data storesPE
Materialized ViewPre-compute views over data for efficient queriesPE
ShardingDistribute data across partitions for scale and performancePE, R
Static Content HostingServe static content from cloud storage/CDN directlyPE, CO
Valet KeyGrant clients limited direct access to storage resourcesS, PE
Design & Structure
PatternSummaryPillars
AmbassadorOffload cross-cutting concerns to a helper sidecar proxyOE
Anti-Corruption LayerTranslate between new and legacy system modelsOE, R
Backends for FrontendsCreate separate backends per frontend type (mobile, web, etc.)OE, PE
Compute Resource ConsolidationCombine multiple workloads into fewer compute instancesCO
External Configuration StoreExternalize configuration from deployment packagesOE
SidecarDeploy helper components alongside the main serviceOE
Strangler FigIncrementally migrate legacy systems by replacing piecesOE, R
Security & Access
PatternSummaryPillars
Federated IdentityDelegate authentication to an external identity providerS
GatekeeperProtect services using a dedicated broker that validates requestsS
QuarantineIsolate and validate external assets before allowing useS
Rate LimitingControl consumption rate of resources by consumersR, S
ThrottlingControl resource consumption to sustain SLAs under loadR, PE
Deployment & Scaling
PatternSummaryPillars
Deployment StampsDeploy multiple independent copies of application componentsR, PE
Edge Workload ConfigurationConfigure workloads differently across diverse edge devicesOE
Gateway AggregationAggregate multiple backend calls into a single client requestPE
Gateway OffloadingOffload shared functionality (SSL, auth) to a gatewayOE, S
Gateway RoutingRoute requests to multiple backends using a single endpointOE
GeodeDeploy backends to multiple regions for active-active servingR, PE

See Design Patterns Reference for detailed implementation guidance.


Technology Choices

Decision Framework

For each technology area, evaluate: requirements → constraints → tradeoffs → select.

AreaKey OptionsSelection Criteria
ComputeApp Service, Functions, Container Apps, AKS, VMs, BatchHosting model, scaling, cost, team skills
StorageBlob Storage, Data Lake, Files, Disks, Managed LustreAccess patterns, throughput, cost tier
Data storesSQL Database, Cosmos DB, PostgreSQL, Redis, Table StorageConsistency model, query patterns, scale
MessagingService Bus, Event Hubs, Event Grid, Queue StorageOrdering, throughput, pub/sub vs queue
NetworkingFront Door, Application Gateway, Load Balancer, Traffic ManagerGlobal vs regional, L4 vs L7, WAF
AI servicesAzure OpenAI, AI Search, AI Foundry, Document IntelligenceModel needs, data grounding, orchestration
ContainersContainer Apps, AKS, Container InstancesOperational control vs simplicity

See Technology Choices Reference for detailed decision trees.


Best Practices

PracticeKey Guidance
API designRESTful conventions, resource-oriented URIs, HATEOAS, versioning via URL path or header
API implementationAsync operations, pagination, idempotent PUT/DELETE, content negotiation, ETag caching
AutoscalingScale on metrics (CPU, queue depth, custom), cool-down periods, predictive scaling, scale-in protection
Background jobsUse queues or scheduled triggers, idempotent processing, poison message handling, graceful shutdown
CachingCache-aside pattern, TTL policies, cache invalidation strategies, distributed cache for multi-instance
CDNStatic asset offloading, cache-busting with versioned URLs, geo-distribution, HTTPS enforcement
Data partitioningHorizontal (sharding), vertical, functional partitioning; partition key selection for even distribution
Partitioning strategiesHash-based, range-based, directory-based; rebalancing approach, cross-partition query avoidance
Host name preservationPreserve original host header through proxies/gateways for cookies, redirects, auth flows
Message encodingSchema evolution (Avro/Protobuf), backward/forward compatibility, schema registry
Monitoring & diagnosticsStructured logging, distributed tracing (W3C Trace Context), metrics, alerts, dashboards
Transient fault handlingRetry with exponential backoff + jitter, circuit breaker, idempotency keys, timeout budgets

See Best Practices Reference for implementation details.


Performance Antipatterns

Avoid these common patterns that degrade performance under load:

AntipatternProblemFix
Busy DatabaseOffloading too much processing to the databaseMove logic to application tier, use caching
Busy Front EndResource-intensive work on frontend request threadsOffload to background workers/queues
Chatty I/OMany small I/O requests instead of fewer large onesBatch requests, use bulk APIs, buffer writes
Extraneous FetchingRetrieving more data than neededProject only required fields, paginate, filter server-side
Improper InstantiationRecreating expensive objects per requestUse singletons, connection pooling, HttpClientFactory
Monolithic PersistenceSingle data store for all data typesPolyglot persistence — right store for each workload
No CachingRepeatedly fetching unchanged dataCache-aside pattern, CDN, output caching, Redis
Noisy NeighborOne tenant consuming all shared resourcesBulkhead isolation, per-tenant quotas, throttling
Retry StormAggressive retries overwhelming a recovering serviceExponential backoff + jitter, circuit breaker, retry budgets
Synchronous I/OBlocking threads on I/O operationsAsync/await, non-blocking I/O, reactive streams

Mission-Critical Design

For workloads targeting 99.99%+ SLO, address these design areas:

Design AreaKey Considerations
Application platformMulti-region active-active, availability zones, Container Apps or AKS with zone redundancy
Application designStateless services, idempotent operations, graceful degradation, bulkhead isolation
NetworkingAzure Front Door (global LB), DDoS Protection, private endpoints, redundant connectivity
Data platformMulti-region Cosmos DB, zone-redundant SQL, async replication, conflict resolution
Deployment & testingBlue-green deployments, canary releases, chaos engineering, automated rollback
Health modelingComposite health scores, dependency health tracking, automated remediation, SLI dashboards
SecurityZero-trust, managed identity everywhere, key rotation, WAF policies, threat modeling
Operational proceduresAutomated runbooks, incident response playbooks, game days, postmortems

See Mission-Critical Reference for detailed guidance.


Well-Architected Framework (WAF) Pillars

Every architecture decision should be evaluated against all five pillars:

PillarFocusKey Questions
ReliabilityResiliency, availability, disaster recoveryWhat is the RTO/RPO? How does it handle failures? Is there redundancy?
SecurityThreat protection, identity, data protectionIs identity managed? Is data encrypted? Are there network controls?
Cost OptimizationCost management, efficiency, right-sizingIs compute right-sized? Are there reserved instances? Is there waste?
Operational ExcellenceMonitoring, deployment, automationIs deployment automated? Is there observability? Are there runbooks?
Performance EfficiencyScaling, load testing, performance targetsCan it scale horizontally? Are there performance baselines? Is caching used?
WAF Tradeoff Matrix
Optimizing for...May impact...
Reliability (redundancy)Cost (more resources)
Security (isolation)Performance (added latency)
Cost (consolidation)Reliability (shared failure domains)
Performance (caching)Cost (cache infrastructure), Reliability (stale data)

Architecture Review Workflow

When reviewing or designing a system, follow this structured approach:

Step 1: Identify Requirements
Functional: What must the system do?
Non-functional:
  - Availability target (e.g., 99.9%, 99.99%)
  - Latency requirements (p50, p95, p99)
  - Throughput (requests/sec, messages/sec)
  - Data residency and compliance
  - Recovery targets (RTO, RPO)
  - Cost constraints
Step 2: Select Architecture Style

Match requirements to architecture style using the selection criteria table above.

Step 3: Choose Technology Stack

Use the technology choices decision framework. Prefer managed services (PaaS) over IaaS.

Step 4: Apply Design Patterns

Select relevant patterns from the 44 cloud design patterns based on identified concerns.

Step 5: Address Cross-Cutting Concerns
  • Identity & access — Microsoft Entra ID, managed identity, RBAC

  • Monitoring — Application Insights, Azure Monitor, Log Analytics

  • Security — Network segmentation, encryption at rest/in transit, Key Vault

  • CI/CD — GitHub Actions, Azure DevOps Pipelines, infrastructure as code

Step 6: Validate Against WAF Pillars

Review each pillar systematically. Document tradeoffs explicitly.

Step 7: Document Decisions

Use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs):

# ADR-NNN: [Decision Title]

## Status: [Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated]

## Context
[What is the issue we're addressing?]

## Decision
[What did we decide and why?]

## Consequences
[What are the positive and negative impacts?]

References


Source

Content derived from the Azure Architecture Center — Microsoft's official guidance for cloud solution architecture on Azure. Covers design principles, architecture styles, cloud design patterns, technology choices, best practices, performance antipatterns, mission-critical design, and the Well-Architected Framework.

Files

references/architecture-styles.md

Azure Architecture Styles Reference

Comparison Table

StyleDependency ManagementDomain Type
N-tierHorizontal tiers divided by subnetTraditional business, low update frequency
Web-Queue-WorkerFront/back-end decoupled by async messagingSimple domain, resource-intensive tasks
MicroservicesVertically decomposed services via APIsComplex domain, frequent updates
Event-drivenProducer/consumer, independent viewsIoT, real-time systems
Big dataDivide into small chunks, parallel processingBatch/real-time data analysis, ML
Big computeData allocation to thousands of coresCompute-intensive (simulation)

1. N-tier

Traditional architecture that divides an application into logical layers and physical tiers. Each layer has a specific responsibility and communicates only with the layer directly below it.

Logical Diagram
┌──────────────────────────────────┐
│        Presentation Tier         │  ← Web / UI
│          (Subnet A)              │
├──────────────────────────────────┤
│       Business Logic Tier        │  ← Rules / Workflows
│          (Subnet B)              │
├──────────────────────────────────┤
│        Data Access Tier          │  ← Database / Storage
│          (Subnet C)              │
└──────────────────────────────────┘
Benefits
  • Familiar pattern for most development teams

  • Natural mapping for migrating existing layered applications to Azure

  • Clear separation of concerns between tiers

Challenges
  • Horizontal layering makes cross-cutting changes difficult — a single feature may touch every tier

  • Limits agility and release velocity as tiers are tightly coupled vertically

Best Practices
  • Use VNet subnets to isolate tiers and control traffic flow with NSGs

  • Keep each tier stateless where possible to enable horizontal scaling

  • Use managed services (App Service, Azure SQL) to reduce operational overhead

Dependency Management

Horizontal tiers divided by subnet. Each tier depends only on the tier directly below it, enforced through network segmentation.

  • Azure App Service

  • Azure SQL Database

  • Azure Virtual Machines

  • Azure Virtual Network (subnets)


2. Web-Queue-Worker

A web front end handles HTTP requests while a worker process performs resource-intensive or long-running tasks. The two components communicate through an asynchronous message queue.

Logical Diagram
                ┌───────────┐
 HTTP ─────────►│    Web    │
 Requests       │ Front End │
                └─────┬─────┘
                      │
                      ▼
               ┌──────────────┐
               │  Message     │
               │  Queue       │
               └──────┬───────┘
                      │
                      ▼
                ┌───────────┐
                │  Worker   │
                │  Process  │
                └─────┬─────┘
                      │
                      ▼
                ┌───────────┐
                │  Database │
                └───────────┘
Benefits
  • Easy to understand and deploy, especially with managed compute services

  • Clean separation between interactive and background workloads

  • Each component can scale independently

Challenges
  • Without careful design, the front end and worker can become monolithic components that are hard to maintain and update

  • Hidden dependencies may emerge if front end and worker share data schemas or storage

Best Practices
  • Keep the web front end thin — delegate heavy processing to the worker

  • Use durable message queues to ensure work is not lost on failure

  • Design idempotent worker operations to handle message retries safely

Dependency Management

Front-end and back-end jobs are decoupled by asynchronous messaging. The web tier never calls the worker directly; all communication flows through the queue.

  • Azure App Service

  • Azure Functions

  • Azure Queue Storage

  • Azure Service Bus


3. Microservices

A collection of small, autonomous services where each service implements a single business capability. Each service owns its bounded context and data, and communicates with other services via well-defined APIs.

Logical Diagram
┌──────────┐   ┌──────────┐   ┌──────────┐
│ Service  │   │ Service  │   │ Service  │
│    A     │   │    B     │   │    C     │
│ ┌──────┐ │   │ ┌──────┐ │   │ ┌──────┐ │
│ │ Data │ │   │ │ Data │ │   │ │ Data │ │
│ └──────┘ │   │ └──────┘ │   │ └──────┘ │
└────┬─────┘   └────┬─────┘   └────┬─────┘
     │              │              │
     └──────┬───────┘──────────────┘
            ▼
     ┌──────────────┐
     │ API Gateway  │
     └──────┬───────┘
            │
         Clients
Benefits
  • Autonomous teams can develop, deploy, and scale services independently

  • Enables frequent updates and higher release velocity

  • Technology diversity — each service can use the stack best suited to its task

Challenges
  • Service discovery and inter-service communication add complexity

  • Data consistency across services requires patterns like Saga or eventual consistency

  • Distributed system management (monitoring, debugging, tracing) is inherently harder

Best Practices
  • Define clear bounded contexts — avoid sharing databases between services

  • Use an API gateway for cross-cutting concerns (auth, rate limiting, routing)

  • Implement health checks, circuit breakers, and distributed tracing from day one

Dependency Management

Vertically decomposed services calling each other via APIs. Each service is independently deployable with its own data store, minimizing coupling.

  • Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)

  • Azure Container Apps

  • Azure API Management

  • Azure Service Bus

  • Azure Cosmos DB


4. Event-driven

A publish-subscribe architecture where event producers emit events and event consumers react to them. Producers and consumers are fully decoupled, communicating only through event channels or brokers.

Logical Diagram
┌──────────┐     ┌──────────────────┐     ┌──────────┐
│ Producer │────►│                  │────►│ Consumer │
│    A     │     │   Event Broker   │     │    A     │
└──────────┘     │   / Channel     │     └──────────┘
                 │                  │
┌──────────┐     │  ┌────────────┐ │     ┌──────────┐
│ Producer │────►│  │  Pub/Sub   │ │────►│ Consumer │
│    B     │     │  │  or Stream │ │     │    B     │
└──────────┘     │  └────────────┘ │     └──────────┘
                 └──────────────────┘

Two models: Pub/Sub (events delivered to subscribers) and Event Streaming (events written to an ordered log for consumers to read).

Consumer variations: Simple event processing, basic correlation, complex event processing, event stream processing.

Benefits
  • Producers and consumers are fully decoupled — they can evolve independently

  • Highly scalable — add consumers without affecting producers

  • Responsive and well-suited to real-time processing pipelines

Challenges
  • Guaranteed delivery requires careful broker configuration and dead-letter handling

  • Event ordering can be difficult to maintain across partitions

  • Eventual consistency — consumers may see stale data temporarily

  • Error handling and poison message management add operational complexity

Best Practices
  • Design events as immutable facts with clear schemas

  • Use dead-letter queues for events that fail processing

  • Implement idempotent consumers to handle duplicate delivery safely

Dependency Management

Producer/consumer model with independent views per subsystem. Producers have no knowledge of consumers; each subsystem maintains its own projection of the event stream.

  • Azure Event Grid

  • Azure Event Hubs

  • Azure Functions

  • Azure Service Bus

  • Azure Stream Analytics


5. Big Data

Architecture designed to handle ingestion, processing, and analysis of data that is too large or complex for traditional database systems.

Logical Diagram
┌─────────────┐    ┌──────────────────────────────────┐
│ Data Sources│───►│          Data Storage             │
│ (logs, IoT, │    │         (Data Lake)               │
│  files)     │    └──┬──────────────┬─────────────────┘
└─────────────┘       │              │
                      ▼              ▼
              ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐
              │    Batch     │ │  Real-time   │
              │  Processing  │ │  Processing  │
              └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘
                     │                │
                     ▼                ▼
              ┌───────────────────────────────┐
              │   Analytical Data Store       │
              └──────────────┬────────────────┘
                             │
              ┌──────────────▼────────────────┐
              │   Analysis & Reporting        │
              │   (Dashboards, ML Models)     │
              └───────────────────────────────┘

         Orchestration manages the full pipeline

Components: Data sources → Data storage (data lake) → Batch processing → Real-time processing → Analytical data store → Analysis and reporting → Orchestration.

Benefits
  • Process massive datasets that exceed traditional database capacity

  • Support both batch and real-time analytics in a single architecture

  • Enable predictive analytics and machine learning at scale

Challenges
  • Complexity of coordinating batch and real-time processing paths

  • Data quality and governance across a data lake require disciplined schema management

  • Cost management — large-scale storage and compute can grow unpredictably

Best Practices
  • Use parallelism for both batch and real-time processing

  • Partition data to enable parallel reads and writes

  • Apply schema-on-read semantics to keep ingestion flexible

  • Process data in batches on arrival rather than waiting for scheduled windows

  • Balance usage costs against time-to-insight requirements

Dependency Management

Divide huge datasets into small chunks for parallel processing. Each chunk can be processed independently, with an orchestration layer coordinating the overall pipeline.

  • Microsoft Fabric

  • Azure Data Lake Storage

  • Azure Event Hubs

  • Azure SQL Database

  • Azure Cosmos DB

  • Power BI


6. Big Compute

Architecture for large-scale workloads that require hundreds or thousands of cores running in parallel. Tasks can be independent (embarrassingly parallel) or tightly coupled requiring inter-node communication.

Logical Diagram
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│              Job Scheduler                  │
│         (submit, monitor, manage)           │
└─────────────────┬───────────────────────────┘
                  │
    ┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
    ▼             ▼             ▼
┌────────┐  ┌────────┐  ┌────────────────┐
│ Core   │  │ Core   │  │ Core           │
│ Pool 1 │  │ Pool 2 │  │ Pool N         │
│(100s)  │  │(100s)  │  │(1000s of cores)│
└───┬────┘  └───┬────┘  └───┬────────────┘
    │           │            │
    └─────────┬─┘────────────┘
              ▼
     ┌──────────────┐
     │   Results    │
     │   Storage    │
     └──────────────┘

Use cases: Simulations, financial risk modeling, oil exploration, drug design, image rendering.

Benefits
  • High performance through massive parallel processing

  • Access to specialized hardware (GPU, FPGA, InfiniBand) for compute-intensive workloads

  • Scales to thousands of cores for embarrassingly parallel problems

Challenges
  • Managing VM infrastructure at scale (provisioning, patching, decommissioning)

  • Provisioning thousands of cores in a timely manner to meet job deadlines

  • Cost control — idle compute resources are expensive

Best Practices
  • Use low-priority or spot VMs to reduce cost for fault-tolerant workloads

  • Auto-scale compute pools based on job queue depth

  • Partition work into independent tasks when possible to maximize parallelism

Dependency Management

Data allocation to thousands of cores. The job scheduler distributes work units across the compute pool, with each core processing its assigned data partition independently.

  • Azure Batch

  • Microsoft HPC Pack

  • H-series Virtual Machines (HPC-optimized)


Source: Azure Architecture Center

Requirements and compatibility

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Published by
Microsoft
Publisher
Microsoft (Official)
Source
microsoft/skills · .github/skills/cloud-solution-architect · commit 0696600
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Microsoft.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download cloud-solution-architect.zip