4 ms·

You're right, I didn't give any numbers. IMO for every dozen engineers you are allowed one monolith (but now you call it a service).

• marcosdumay 3y ago
  > but now you call it a service What is a problem in itself. On every sane place, most of the "services" aren't providing any on-demand service, instead they are just thematic monoliths doing all of a part of a task. I'm settling on the opinion that a service-based architecture is always wrong. But people keep calling the good architectures by that name.
  • jameshart 3y ago
    Well, you’re almost at the moment of enlightenment. Yes, all the good architectures are service based. And all service based architectures are wrong. Because all architectures are wrong. In the sense that there’s always another way you could have architected it that would be better for where you think you want to go next, than the way it is architected. Learn to accept that an evolving software system is always going to have a suboptimal architecture.
    • marcosdumay 3y ago
      Hum... No. You are misinterpreting my words here. I'm saying that I now strongly suspect that biasing the way you divide your software on a direction that gives you services will always make your life worse (probably by a lot). There's no philosophical allegory about perfect things not existing. There are a few things that really want to be services. You'll settle those on services whatever way you decide to architecture your software. But those are very few, and any push into doing it for more than the absolute minimum is harmful.