CQRS/ES requires a different way of thinking and a different set of best practices. This could make it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. That being said: -

CQRS/ES requires a different way of thinking and a different set of best practices. This could make it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. That being said: - Dealing with failures can be better than traditional systems if done properly. For example, we have services where, if they fail, won't bring down the entire system. However, this does require you to be more explicit on how you handle errors. - I have found debugging to be easier. When an error occurs, we can trace it back to the exact command and the events it generated. This allows us to see 1. the exact state of the system at the time the error-producing command was generated and 2. the exact command that was executed. From this we can easily reproduce the error. I have covered "versioning events" in my other comment. Please be more specific about "projection, reporting, maintenance, administration". What exactly were the challenges there? I understand that ES is not a silver bullet but I would like others to have a clear understanding of the tradeoffs to traditional systems.