3 ms·

(quite impressed by the sheer number of comments you have made in this thread, btw) > For example it can be way simpler to use a in-memory cache than a network

(quite impressed by the sheer number of comments you have made in this thread, btw) > For example it can be way simpler to use a in-memory cache than a network attached cache and by doing so you save yourself a dependency, a potential network request that can fail, etc. Elsewhere you decided against using cloudflare's kv because it was a poor fit for "cache invalidation" -- "way simpler"? -- and then of course turns out you really don't know if it's a bad fit. > by spaghetti I'm more referring to the architecture of your application being turned into networked components, i.e a distributed system. That is a novel definition of "spagetti". It's a pejorative term in software sense. Why? > It's pretty much accepted fact now that distributed systems are by far the most challenging area of both computer science and software engineering. Ahem. So it caching and cache invalidation. But that didn't stop you, so exactly how is this line you seem to draw with such vocal authority regarding "bad hard", "good hard" informed technically?

_gabe_ 3y ago
> That is a novel definition of "spagetti". It's a pejorative term in software sense. Why? I don't necessarily agree with everything OP is saying, and I certainly don't speak for them, but I completely understand what they mean by a big ball of microservice spaghetti. The spaghetti is distributed across a massive literal network of dependencies instead of being distributed off a giant graph of object dependencies, or goto statements or something. The spaghetti is real and just as messy in the microservice world as the monolith world. I should know, we inherited a massive one. But this shouldn't be too much of a revelation since there is no silver bullet in taming software architecture. Architecting software is very subjective, and more often than not we make the wrong decisions and have to untangle the mistakes further down the road.
- eternalban 3y ago
  > I completely understand what they mean by a big ball of microservice spaghetti Sure, I understand that too, but that's not what was said. Here it is again: > by spaghetti I'm more referring to the architecture of your application being turned into networked components, i.e a distributed system.
  - Aeolun 3y ago
    How is that not what was said. Your application is going to be spaghetti anyway, networked spaghetti is orders of magnitude worse. I should know, I have a ball of networked spaghetti.
    - intelVISA 3y ago
      Chef's law: spaghetti cannot be removed or added, only distributed.
jpgvm 3y ago
> Elsewhere you decided against using cloudflare's kv because it was a poor fit for "cache invalidation" -- "way simpler"? -- and then of course turns out you really don't know if it's a bad fit. I evaluated it at the time. I don't have the context loaded to remember exactly why it didn't work for my use-case but I'm going to look again because CFs platform moves pretty fast and perhaps it could be simpler than what we are currently doing. > That is a novel definition of "spagetti". It's a pejorative term in software sense. Why? Elsewhere it's been coined Lambda Pinball, perhaps you find that a more pleasing description? > Ahem. So it caching and cache invalidation. But that didn't stop you, so exactly how is this line you seem to draw with such vocal authority regarding "bad hard", "good hard" informed technically? Yes, both of which are generally necessary in distributed systems. i.e not only is it a hard problem in and of itself it requires solving sub-problems which are also some of the hardest problems. I think you may have made my points for me.
- zerbinxx 3y ago
  I think in general you’re right on the money and have been throughout your comments here. Lambda pinball is a great term as well. I agree that serverless incentivizes a “nanoservice” approach that flies in the face of patterns like classes/factories or DDD, since everything is atomic you lose the concept of a service or domain boundary and everything can get muddled as hell.

_gabe_ 3y ago

> That is a novel definition of "spagetti". It's a pejorative term in software sense. Why? I don't necessarily agree with everything OP is saying, and I certainly don't speak for them, but I completely understand what they mean by a big ball of microservice spaghetti. The spaghetti is distributed across a massive literal network of dependencies instead of being distributed off a giant graph of object dependencies, or goto statements or something. The spaghetti is real and just as messy in the microservice world as the monolith world. I should know, we inherited a massive one. But this shouldn't be too much of a revelation since there is no silver bullet in taming software architecture. Architecting software is very subjective, and more often than not we make the wrong decisions and have to untangle the mistakes further down the road.

eternalban 3y ago
> I completely understand what they mean by a big ball of microservice spaghetti Sure, I understand that too, but that's not what was said. Here it is again: > by spaghetti I'm more referring to the architecture of your application being turned into networked components, i.e a distributed system.
- Aeolun 3y ago
  How is that not what was said. Your application is going to be spaghetti anyway, networked spaghetti is orders of magnitude worse. I should know, I have a ball of networked spaghetti.
  - intelVISA 3y ago
    Chef's law: spaghetti cannot be removed or added, only distributed.

jpgvm 3y ago

> Elsewhere you decided against using cloudflare's kv because it was a poor fit for "cache invalidation" -- "way simpler"? -- and then of course turns out you really don't know if it's a bad fit. I evaluated it at the time. I don't have the context loaded to remember exactly why it didn't work for my use-case but I'm going to look again because CFs platform moves pretty fast and perhaps it could be simpler than what we are currently doing. > That is a novel definition of "spagetti". It's a pejorative term in software sense. Why? Elsewhere it's been coined Lambda Pinball, perhaps you find that a more pleasing description? > Ahem. So it caching and cache invalidation. But that didn't stop you, so exactly how is this line you seem to draw with such vocal authority regarding "bad hard", "good hard" informed technically? Yes, both of which are generally necessary in distributed systems. i.e not only is it a hard problem in and of itself it requires solving sub-problems which are also some of the hardest problems. I think you may have made my points for me.

zerbinxx 3y ago
I think in general you’re right on the money and have been throughout your comments here. Lambda pinball is a great term as well. I agree that serverless incentivizes a “nanoservice” approach that flies in the face of patterns like classes/factories or DDD, since everything is atomic you lose the concept of a service or domain boundary and everything can get muddled as hell.