Ph3Context /h3 pThe solution to be studied is based on a Java / Spring Boot microservices architecture, supplemented by a TypeScript / Angular micro‑frontend approach, a DSP based on Kafka, critical mass processing (Spring Batch), and several distinct PostgreSQL databases per business domain, supplemented by 360 views and a synchronized reference base used daily for statistical or reporting purposes. The solution is containerized and runs with Podman. Each business domain is supported by approximately 4 Java applications, each placed in a separate container. This solution is developed to replace, in an iso‑functional manner, another software already in place; the deployment of this solution therefore involves reusing data from the existing software. The metrics, as of 01/04/2026, highlight a significant application volume, of the order of 528,000 lines of code, including: ~475,000 Java lines, ~85,000 TypeScript / Angular lines, supplemented by SQL, CSS/SASS and various scripts. Insufficient performance in several key processes, potentially stemming from the implemented architecture, necessitates an independent, objective and actionable diagnosis. /p h3Objectives of the Mission /h3 ul liEvaluate the overall performance of the application solution, both for current operation by users in transactional mode and for mass processing. /li liAnalyze the relevance of the division into microservices with regard to functional responsibilities, inter‑application flows (synchronous and asynchronous), consistency and volume constraints. /li liIdentify the root causes of observed or latent dysfunctions (performance, excessive coupling, BD contention, etc.). /li liEvaluate transactional robustness and data consistency management in a distributed context (choreography, outbox/inbox, idempotence). /li liAssess the level of resilience and observability (monitoring, metrics, logs, traceability, incident recovery) with regard to the SPW requirements. /li liProduce structured, prioritized and realistic recommendations to guide development decisions (refactoring, reorganization of services, targeted optimizations). /li liAssess the operational robustness of the solution in the face of incidents, application errors or degraded situations (exception management, behavior in the event of partial failure, continuity of service). /li liIdentify structural technical risks likely to have a lasting impact on the performance, stability or maintainability of the solution. /li liIdentify the risks and points of weakness linked to existing or planned data recovery mechanisms (quality, completeness, integrity, performance, etc.). /li liIdentify the levers to strengthen internal control of the information system and secure continuity of service in the event of a change in the sourcing method. /li /ul h3Scope of the Mission /h3 pThe scope covers in particular: /pul liBackend microservices and associated PostgreSQL databases: data models, access, performance, replication and view strategies; /li liInter‑service communications, including REST and SOAP APIs, event exchanges via Kafka/DSP (choreography), file exchanges via FTP; /li liMass processing and continuous flows (Spring Batch, outbox/inbox, idempotence); /li liThe application infrastructure that influences performance, to the extent that it directly impacts the observed behaviors. /li /ul Additionally, the mission includes analysis of planned mechanisms for data and document recovery (GED Alfresco/S3) and the impact of data recovery on overall performance, consistency in a distributed context and robustness of processing chains. h3Deliverables /h3 ul liAn executive summary for management, highlighting key findings, major risks and the main levers of action. /li liA detailed audit report, including supported findings, both qualitative and quantitative; argued and supported technical analyses. /li liA prioritized recommendations plan, crossing the criteria of impact, effort and risk. /li liA specific analysis relating in particular to: maintainability and robustness in the medium term; issues related to data recovery; dependence on the service provider. /li liA summary map of structuring technical risks, accompanied by management recommendations. /li liA restitution support (PowerPoint type), intended for governance bodies. /li /ul h3Prerequisites – Provider’s Skills /h3 pThe service provider is expected to have an independent, factual and pragmatic approach; an ability to interact with expert teams (SPW, service provider, architects); a strong capacity for synthesis, particularly for decision‑making bodies; and a clear orientation toward concrete and actionable recommendations, compatible with the operational constraints of the program. Access to the relevant source code, architectural documents, document recovery descriptions and a dedicated application sandbox will be provided under the control of the SPW. /p h3Required Skills /h3 ul liExcellent communication in French with management bodies. /li liCapacity for critical analysis and synthesis. /li liAutonomy and rigor. /li liPragmatic approach oriented to operational recommendations. /li /ul /p #J-18808-Ljbffr