View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Architecture Decision RecordHypothesis-Driven TroubleshootingFault IsolationRequest for Comments
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |  Engineering Fault Isolation |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. | In technical failures, the visible symptom often gets mixed up with the actual cause. Fault Isolation narrows the fault space and progressively reduces which part of the system is truly affected. | An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 30-240 min | 30-180 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 1-6 | 1-6 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary | Fault Isolation Map, Test Log, Excluded Hypotheses, Narrowed Fault Area | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis | TroubleshootingDiagnosisEngineering | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |