3 ms·
The whole microservices thing is a little crazy. Someone just looked at what devs came to realize worked well, slapped a name on it and it blew up as a hot thi
by gorjusborg 3y ago
The whole microservices thing is a little crazy.
Someone just looked at what devs came to realize worked well, slapped a name on it and it blew up as a hot thing.
Since then, I've seen so much wrong done in the name of 'microservices'. It shouldn't be some aspirational goal to work with them.
Also, the fact that the word 'micro' is in the name makes the cargo culters split atoms to reach some tiny nirvana. The size isn't the point. The real point is in having the system/component boundaries closely match the problem domain, and that a single group 'maintains' it.
- ponector 3y agoAfter few years of development, current project has around 30 microservises which are dependent on each other, communicate through Kafka and have individual mongo databases each with lots of data duplication. We call it distributed monolith. It has the worst things of the both architectures.
- Scubabear68 3y agoThe “micro” moniker is very unfortunate. I have seen architectures where endless strings of lambdas are strung together like function calls, with the developer not realizing or caring that each is a process, and each call is a network call. Literally one service per function, with the completely expected result of horrible performance and high error rates. They should’ve been called domain services or something.