3 ms·
Then it sounds like you can only have a true microservice architecture if your application doesn't really need transactional guarantees, consistency or fault to
by ulrikrasmussen 1mo ago
Then it sounds like you can only have a true microservice architecture if your application doesn't really need transactional guarantees, consistency or fault tolerance.
- win311fwg 1mo agoThen you must have heard the wrong thing. Oh well. You can't communicate with everyone.
- ulrikrasmussen 1mo agoThen please help me understand, it is entirely possible that I misunderstood you, but you are not clarifying your point.
- win311fwg 1mo agoYou were happy with your interpretation before. Perhaps that's sufficient?
- kstenerud 1mo agoMicroservices are just another "cache" level in the end. They can make sense in the right situations, but you need to make your architecture deliberate in order to reap its advantages. Idempotent services are an easy win, and also places where you have data locality (similar to cache locality, just a few levels lower). At the end of the day, it comes down to: - how far does the data have to travel, and at what cost? - how much latency can your process tolerate? - how much unreliability can your process tolerate? - where and how do you isolate resources that are concurrency sensitive? - what's the infrastructure going to cost?