Page 03 · Recommendations

Technology Recommendations

Architecture, stack, infrastructure, DevOps and non-functional commitments — each benchmarked against the RFP and industry standard. Use the tabs to navigate.

Architecture & technology

Parts Manager · RFP §5

RFP recommendation

Modular monolith with clearly separated domain modules — designed so the system can be decomposed into microservices in the future without a full rewrite.

Smart Waves Innovation · Recommendation

Microservices APIs

Each core domain built as an independently deployable API service — its own endpoints, with a shared database schema across services. Skips the future re-platforming step entirely.

Why we recommend this

True service isolation, independent release cadence per domain, fault containment, and the ability to scale only the services under load (RFQ distribution, matching, notifications) instead of the whole platform. Avoids the "future migration" cost the RFP anticipates.

Core domain APIs

Authentication & Access Control API

Workshop Management API

Retailer Management API

Vehicle, VIN & OE Mapping API

RFQ Management API

Quotation Management API

Matching Engine API

Order Management API

Delivery & Logistics API

Payments & Refunds API

Notification Service API

Admin Operations API

Analytics & Reporting API

Audit Logging & Monitoring API

Architectural objectives

▸Independently deployable services — each domain owns its data and lifecycle

▸Horizontal scalability per service based on real-world load patterns

▸Avoid vendor lock-in through widely adopted technologies and open standards

▸Support GCC expansion, bilingual (Arabic/English) interfaces and RTL

▸Clear API contracts (OpenAPI) between services and clients

▸Critical workflows are auditable and operationally traceable