3 ms·
Microservices is too catchy name. It somehow implicitly means to people less complexity, but the reality is quite opposite. They should be called "a lot of litt
by mirekrusin 4y ago
Microservices is too catchy name. It somehow implicitly means to people less complexity, but the reality is quite opposite. They should be called "a lot of little monoliths that we have to make always running and compatible with each other when updating" would reflect more appropriatelly what it is. Good analogy is replacing wheels for better ones while driving. In non microservice system you stop, change wheels and start driving again with new wheels. With microservices you need to do it while driving and it's going to be more complicated.
- hderms 4y agoImo there's a huge distinction between microservices in a monorepo or microservices where there are 100s or thousands of git repos. Monorepo can be much easier as you can at least verify the given build is consistent. Monoliths don't completely avoid the problem of version compatibility, they just reduce it to a more clear layer of external clients and compatibility between N-1th release and Nth release. That's certainly worth it in the early stages of a project