3 ms·
Two things jump out at me initially. First, the assertion that cargo-culting is bad is hardly revelatory, regardless of the paradigm. Secondly, the five point
by fallous 9y ago
Two things jump out at me initially. First, the assertion that cargo-culting is bad is hardly revelatory, regardless of the paradigm. Secondly, the five point list at the end of the diatribe is exactly what any transition from legacy monolithic system would follow in order to pursue a microservice infrastructure.
I can't decide if the author actually has a problem with an appropriately deployed microservice architecture (and no, you do not need 100 engineers to support such a thing... I replaced a legacy back-end system for a $100M/yr revenue company with such an architecture using 4 devs) or if this is just a misapplied generic rant about cargo culting that has been applied to $THINGIREADABOUTTODAY.
- mailshanx 9y agoIronically, it is a cargo-cult rant against cargo-culting!
- adamdrake 9y agoHi, author here. Thank you for your feedback, and I'll be sure to take it into account in future writing. I don't have any preference for or against microservices, as long as the benefits they bring outweigh the drawbacks which come along with such an approach. The goal wasn't so much to rant against cargo culting, but to provide some counter points along with a more measured progression for moving towards microservices. I agree that the points at the end should be what such a transition looks like, but it's amazing how often companies skip the first two steps and try to immediately break up their monolith as a form of technical bankruptcy, which is rarely warranted. Thank you again for the comments!