“Most software fails not because it was written poorly — but because it wasn’t designed to survive reality.”
Sounds dramatic? Maybe. But think of at least one project that crashed not because of the code, merely because someone didn’t take blackout into account. They didn’t have time to buy batteries. Or they just didn’t think that the product might be in the blackout zone, because, well, it happens. Especially if you’re somewhere reality doesn’t come with a safety net.
In Silicon Valley, architecture is often something between a philosophy and a framework. In Lviv, it’s a survival kit. Not for decoration, but for survival. Not because of a love of complex schemes, but because you either build a system that will withstand, or tomorrow a client from Israel asks in a chat: “Why do you have zero uptime?”
And that’s why software development in Eastern Europe in recent years has not sounded like a “budget alternative” but rather a synonym for “architectural endurance.” Because here they build not on ideas — but on scars, instincts, and production pressure. And this experience is sometimes painful, sometimes chaotic, but very real.
You can, of course, say: “We are not in danger of this.” But while you’re reading this, some team in Dnipro is deploying an update with a siren. And another one in Sofia is testing the product on a dev, because the client knocked out the main cluster… by accident. And it’s working.
DevOps that doesn’t play DevOps
DevOps has a thing called CI/CD. In presentations, it usually looks like magic: a click and everything goes into production. However in reality, when there’s half a minute between a click and the production falling down, you want DevOps to be a little less perfect.
For them, it’s not about convenience. It’s about endurance. Distributed-by-default is not a choice, but a condition. Starlink is not a technology of the future, but something that is essential for a morning stand-up show. Redundant APIs, VPNs, distributed clusters — does it sound like overengineering? Maybe so. From the first days of the full-scale war on our eastern border, teams like N-iX adapted the infrastructure to work even with 20% access to electricity — and during these 2 hours, they deployed the product to AWS in London.
Here’s what’s interesting about the example of Ukraine: those who have been through shelling, blackouts, and cyberattacks are calm about “planned” cloud failures. Because they are not a failure. It’s just a Thursday.
Another thing is when DevOps in startups is an add-on. They came up with a product, taped Jenkins down, and CI seems to be in place. But under load, everything falls apart. And DevOps means “it helps only when you have time.”
Simple tools take on complex forms. For example:
- CI/CD serves not only for the convenience of releases, but also as a failover system.
- Tiered delivery allows you to deploy in parts and roll back instantly.
- Backup domains — for cases when the main one is blacklisted or DNS is broken.
Architects instead of hands
This is a painful topic. Many Western companies are still looking for “hands” rather than “heads.” People who do not think, but simply implement. But this is not the problem. The problem is that when your system starts to crack, “hands” will not save you. It is those who understand why it is cracking and what else can be done before it is too late that can save it.
And here we are again — greetings from Eastern Europe. Another shift is the role of the team. In development hubs across the CEE region, the thinking isn’t “hire developers,” it’s “bring partners into the architecture.” At N-iX, this is already standard practice: devs don’t wait for a manager to point out what’s broken — they show up with a fix and a roadmap, often before the client even realizes there’s a problem.
These teams:
- Propose architectural changes on their own if they see weaknesses.
- Have their own backups to the flow and can restore it even without PM.
- Cooperate in a shared ownership mode: They don’t just tick boxes — they ask: what happens next if this breaks?
Shared ownership is not about fancy words on LinkedIn. It’s about a morning call where a developer from Bulgaria says: “We rewrote a part of the pipeline here because it was crashing with a lot of traffic. See if it’s okay for you.” And this is the norm. Not because someone asked, but because everyone understands that architecture is a team game. A non-commit is not your area of responsibility. The product is.
And now to be a little honest
Not all systems built under pressure survive. Sometimes it falls anyway. Sometimes it hurts. Sometimes — very much. But what remains works. And it doesn’t even look like a compromise. It looks more like an experience — just how they learned to breathe there.
Eastern Europe-based development teams did not invent a new architecture. It simply lived in an environment where architecture is more than an option, it is a fuse against disorder. From chaos. From the CTO not calling clients in the morning to apologize, just looking at the dashboard and seeing nothing. Calmness. Silence. It works.
Someone will say: “But we are not in the risk zone.” The question is not where you are. It’s when it will come to you. And whether you will be ready when it comes.
Conclusion
Perhaps we are entering an era where architecture is not just “important.” It determines the lifespan of a product. Perhaps even more than UI/UX, marketing, and even the product itself. After all, what good is a feature that doesn’t live until the morning?
The paradox is that while some are still getting used to the new reality, others are already building for it. Not hypotheses, not MVPs. But structures. With concrete in the foundation. And with people who know what to do when the world moves a little bit again.
Maybe this is not the “architecture of the future.” But it is definitely architecture that has survived to this day. And this, you will agree, is already enough to listen to.
