4 ms·

First he fuels the hype. The he backpedals. A master of self-promotion.

jermo 11y ago
You seem to have an issue with the author but you don't address his arguments. What's the point? Otherwise it just comes off as gratuitous negativity and ad-hominem.
bpicolo 11y ago
It's almost as if there's no solution that's correct 100% of the time
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  This does : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_coupling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_coupling It seems a lot of people confuse "microservice architecture" for "loosely coupled architecture".
  - buckbova 11y ago
    Coupling and cohesion are not specific architecture choices like micoservices/business objects/etc but more of a way to describe the program design/architecture.
  - ExpiredLink 11y ago
    "the microservice architectural style [1] is an approach to developing a single application as a suite of small services, each running in its own process and communicating with lightweight mechanisms, often an HTTP resource API. " http://martinfowler.com/articles/microservices.html http://martinfowler.com/articles/microservices.html
    - oldmanjay 11y ago
      Martin Fowler has some interesting ideas and writes some interesting articles, but he's not architecture jesus laying down inviolable laws on mere mortals. We get to virtualize the concepts at will. If I declare that all of my microservices get combined into a single process at the deploy stage, so let it be said, so let it done. Martin Fowler's opinion on it has no bearing. edit: accidental reply click
yummyfajitas 11y ago
As a person who has done this accidentally, I can offer an alternate opinion. First, you learn about a cool new thing, understand it and it's limitations well, and advocate it as an improvement: https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2012/bandit_algorithms_vs_ab.html https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2012/bandit_algorithms_vs... Sometime later, you realize that people are using it well beyond it's domain of usefulness and "backpedal", i.e. try to make sure the limitations are also well known: https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2015/dont_use_bandits.html https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2015/dont_use_bandits.htm...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
mcfunley 11y ago
I think I've spent at least 50% of my career either contributing to or dismantling one Fowler-inspired disaster or another, so I hear you. That said people are fallible and should generally get credit for changing their minds about things.

jermo 11y ago

You seem to have an issue with the author but you don't address his arguments. What's the point? Otherwise it just comes off as gratuitous negativity and ad-hominem.

bpicolo 11y ago

It's almost as if there's no solution that's correct 100% of the time

crdoconnor 11y ago
This does : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_coupling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_coupling It seems a lot of people confuse "microservice architecture" for "loosely coupled architecture".
- buckbova 11y ago
  Coupling and cohesion are not specific architecture choices like micoservices/business objects/etc but more of a way to describe the program design/architecture.
- ExpiredLink 11y ago
  "the microservice architectural style [1] is an approach to developing a single application as a suite of small services, each running in its own process and communicating with lightweight mechanisms, often an HTTP resource API. " http://martinfowler.com/articles/microservices.html http://martinfowler.com/articles/microservices.html
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    Martin Fowler has some interesting ideas and writes some interesting articles, but he's not architecture jesus laying down inviolable laws on mere mortals. We get to virtualize the concepts at will. If I declare that all of my microservices get combined into a single process at the deploy stage, so let it be said, so let it done. Martin Fowler's opinion on it has no bearing. edit: accidental reply click

yummyfajitas 11y ago

As a person who has done this accidentally, I can offer an alternate opinion. First, you learn about a cool new thing, understand it and it's limitations well, and advocate it as an improvement: https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2012/bandit_algorithms_vs_ab.html https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2012/bandit_algorithms_vs... Sometime later, you realize that people are using it well beyond it's domain of usefulness and "backpedal", i.e. try to make sure the limitations are also well known: https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2015/dont_use_bandits.html https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2015/dont_use_bandits.htm...

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

mcfunley 11y ago

I think I've spent at least 50% of my career either contributing to or dismantling one Fowler-inspired disaster or another, so I hear you. That said people are fallible and should generally get credit for changing their minds about things.