4 ms·
Right, and this orchestration layer is supposed to be designed for resilience and stability from the start, because it's an architectural problem that cannot be
by zzzcpan 10y ago
Right, and this orchestration layer is supposed to be designed for resilience and stability from the start, because it's an architectural problem that cannot be fixed later without a complete redesign of everything. There is one such proven architecture - supervision trees and it addresses both problems: complexity and stability. VMs are not even necessary for this, nor are cloud platforms.
- jacques_chester 10y agoI think at this point it's accepted that supervision trees are an app or runtime concern. Operating systems and distributed platforms have to support a wider range of architectural patterns. Disclosure: I work on a cloud platform, Cloud Foundry, on behalf of Pivotal.
- zzzcpan 10y agoSupervision trees have enough flexibility to support any architecture pattern imaginable, you got it kind of backwards. They are like trees of arbitrary architecture patterns. The idea is to limit the scope of any possible problem, so that it only affects a tiny part of the system, but at the same time reducing complexity by only having to deal with little responsibility in each supervisor. Kind of a tiny orchestration system for each service, instead of a centralized one.