This article fails to mention anything about team size which should be the first criteria for any decision about "microservices" (in quotes because it's just ne

This article fails to mention anything about team size which should be the first criteria for any decision about "microservices" (in quotes because it's just new terminology someone made up because service-oriented architecture wasn't cool anymore and they had to prove how original and modern their thinking was). Half of the engineering orgs chasing this fad are <50 people and have absolutely no reason to be adding the overhead of an SOA. The rules of thumb should be if you have more than 1 service per 4 engineers it's too many; and if your total engineering org size is not big enough to support a dedicated infra team of >4 engineers working full-time on tools just to support the other teams then you're not big enough. Over-complicating things to pad your resume might get you into FAANG but it won't make you a good engineer or a good entrepreneur. The sign of a truly senior engineer is one who knows how to keep things as simple as possible to solve real problems while maximizing power to weight ratio of their code. The resume-driven-development anti-pattern is pretending that the problems facing 1000 or 10000 person orgs are your problems. Those large companies got to where they are by solving the problems in front of them, and you won't get to that scale if you don't do the same.