A Review of Event-Driven Architecture Patterns Using Message Brokers in .NET
Keywords:
event-driven architecture, microservices, .NET, message brokers, Apache Kafka, RabbitMQ, Azure Service Bus, Saga pattern, Transactional Outbox pattern, data consistency, asynchronous communicationAbstract
This article describes different event-driven architecture (EDA) patterns that use message brokers to implement distributed computing in .NET. This article also describes data consistency and state management techniques in a distributed system architecture. In response to the industry trend of moving from monolithic architecture to microservice architecture for scalability, agility, and resilience, this project seeks to provide a thorough basis for decision-making for the adoption of EDA patterns and message brokers (like Apache Kafka, RabbitMQ, Azure Service Bus) based on non-functional requirements and organizational maturity levels. The methodological foundation is based on a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), ensuring reproducibility, completeness, and methodological rigor of the analysis. The scientific novelty of this work lies in integrating three analytical dimensions: theoretical architectural patterns, the technological implementation of message brokers, and the practical aspects of applying them within .NET systems. The main findings emphasize that the choice of EDA patterns and broker technologies is not a search for an optimal, universal solution but a deliberate balancing of technical and organizational factors. Successful use of EDA requires maturity and experience in DevOps and observability, as well as strict adherence to idempotency principles. Therefore, the target audience for this article is software architects, developers, and researchers concerned with microservices and event-driven systems of all kinds built on .NET, as well as technical decision-makers responsible for enterprise adoption of EDA.
References
[1]. Auer F, Lenarduzzi V, Felderer M, Taibi D. From monolithic systems to Microservices: An assessment framework. Information and Software Technology. 2021 Sep;137:106600.
[2]. Hassan H, Abdel-Fattah MA, Mohamed W. Migrating from Monolithic to Microservice Architectures: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications. 2024;15(10).
[3]. Laigner R, Almeida AC, Zhou Y. An Empirical Study on Challenges of Event Management in Microservice Architectures. Arxiv. 2024 Aug 1.
[4]. AWS. Transactional outbox pattern [Internet]. AWS. 2025 [cited 2025 Oct 3]. Available from: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/prescriptive-guidance/latest/cloud-design-patterns/transactional-outbox.html
[5]. Braun S, Deßloch S, Wolff E, Elberzhager F, Jedlitschka A. Tackling Consistency-related Design Challenges of Distributed Data-Intensive Systems - An Action Research Study. Arxiv. 2021 Aug 8.
[6]. Richardson C. Microservices Pattern: Transactional outbox [Internet]. Microservices. [cited 2025 Oct 5]. Available from: https://microservices.io/patterns/data/transactional-outbox.html
[7]. Microsoft Learn. Data platform for mission-critical workloads on Azure - Azure Architecture Center [Internet]. Microsoft Learn. 2025 [cited 2025 Oct 6]. Available from: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/architecture/reference-architectures/containers/aks-mission-critical/mission-critical-data-platform
[8]. Microsoft Learn. Transactional Outbox pattern with Azure Cosmos DB [Internet]. Microsoft Learn. [cited 2025 Oct 7]. Available from: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/architecture/databases/guide/transactional-outbox-cosmos
[9]. Daraghmi E, Zhang CP, Yuan SM. Enhancing Saga Pattern for Distributed Transactions within a Microservices Architecture. Applied Sciences. 2022 Jun 19;12(12):6242.
[10]. Lungu S, Nyirenda M. Current Trends in the Management of Distributed Transactions in Micro-Services Architectures: A Systematic Literature Review. Open Journal of Applied Sciences. 2024;14(9):2519–43.
[11]. Fan P, Liu J, Yin W, Wang H, Chen X, Sun H. 2PC*: a distributed transaction concurrency control protocol of multi-microservice based on cloud computing platform. Journal of Cloud Computing. 2020 Jul 23;9(40).
[12]. View of Optimizing Distributed Transactions in Banking APIs: Saga Pattern vs. Two-Phase commit (2PC). The American Journal of Engineering and Technology. 2025;7(06).
[13]. Özkan O, Babur Ö, van den Brand M. Domain-Driven Design in software development: A systematic literature review on implementation, challenges, and effectiveness. Journal of Systems and Software. 2025 Dec;230:112537.
[14]. Alshikh H. Evaluation and Use of Event-Sourcing for Audit Logging [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2025 Sep 13]. Available from: https://reposit.haw-hamburg.de/bitstream/20.500.12738/16034/1/BA_Evaluation_Use_of_Event-Sourcing.pdf
[15]. Caturbawa IGNB, Asri SA, Suasnawa IW, Sapteka AANG, Saptarini H, Yasa KA. Implementation of Command Query Responsibility Segregation (CQRS) in the Competency Test Information System. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science. 2021 Jan 1;1322–6.
[16]. Arafat J, Tasmin F, Poudel S. Next-Generation Event-Driven Architectures: Performance, Scalability, and Intelligent Orchestration Across Messaging Frameworks. Arxiv. 2025.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Serhii Yakhin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who submit papers with this journal agree to the following terms.
