3 ms·
Actually I wonder if your reasoning is circular.. If you saw a coupled mess of microservices with a lot of technical debt you would probably say that it is not
by dagss 8y ago
Actually I wonder if your reasoning is circular..
If you saw a coupled mess of microservices with a lot of technical debt you would probably say that it is not "Microservices" because it is violating the Single Responsibility Principle all over the place. They just tried to do microservices -- but didn't manage to -- so do you then count it as a failure of microservices thinking?
If not then propose a new architectural alternative: The Debt-Free SRP Monolith!!
Sadly, organizations cannot choose to either make a SRP Microservice system or a Debt-Free SRP Monolith. They can only attempt. And I am yet to be convinced to attempting Microservices is that correlated with achieving SRP.
- mlthoughts2018 8y agoI don’t think it’s circular at all. I’m saying that if the level of tech debt is held equal between both a microservice design and an analogous monolith design, then the fact that the microservice design has greater properties of decoupling, isolation and modularity make it de facto better. Obviously if the baseline levels of tech debt or poor implementation are not equal, all bets are off.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]