2 ms·

This isn't a good idea organizationally though. What matters is the performance of the system, not the performance of its parts, this is kind of a systems 101 l

This isn't a good idea organizationally though. What matters is the performance of the system, not the performance of its parts, this is kind of a systems 101 lesson. If you build a car and send each team off to find the best parts in isolation and screw them together, you don't have the best car, you likely have something that doesn't even drive, because the parts don't fit. The performance of a system is in the interaction of its parts, not the sum of the performance of its parts taken individually. Teams can never operate independently because it only ever makes sense to improve a part if it improves the functioning of the entire system. The whole problem with the microservices approach it that it optimizes the wrong thing.

mpyne 4y ago
> This isn't a good idea organizationally though. It's absolutely necessary for very large organizations though. The alternative of trying to centrally plan the IT operations of an organization of, say, 500,000, gets to be quickly intractable. Groups try to do it with frameworks like SAFe and while that may help a little bit, in the end you need to treat different parts of the organization as individual silos that are able to control and execute on their specific mission set within the wider org. Otherwise the complexity of the problem set they're dealing with makes it impossible to do anything without breaking other systems or teams.