Hacker News Reader

Comment by RandyRanderson | Hacker News Reader

Why do they call them "micro services" and not distributed systems? Oh right, it's because distributed systems are obviously really hard to create correctly and no sane person would ever agree to pay for that.

Nice: re-branding. I can't wait for the, maybe "consolidated computing" manifesto (aka turning micro services back into monoliths).

View on HN

What if the services you are writing are independent in that they solve separate business problems, are built by separate teams, have little to no data coupling (e.g. Only basic auth), have different scalability profiles, etc? Separate services are really effective for these cases. Neither micro services nor monoliths are silver bullets. Instead it's possible for each approach to be the best approach in a particular business context.

In several decades of it experience , I've not known or heard of a nontrivial system like the one you describe in the first part of your message.

In the latter part, that must be a disingenuous dichotomy. You don't really believe that just because an avenue exists we should include it in an evaluation?

What about writing modular libraries then?

People are willing to pay for it when you have 50+ engineers trying to push code through one deployment pipeline. There's an inflection point somewhere at which the cost of sharing deployments is no longer worth it.

I actually think this is where good software design and bounded contexts come in. You can perfectly well run a monolith with hundreds of developers if each of the sections is very well contained. There is no need to add network partitions everywhere to enforce this!

This. Usage of multiple nodes, networking, redundancy, etc. is because of operational concerns. It shouldn't be over "development concerns", which is exactly the wrong cause to embarge upon such a long-winded journey!

I'm trying to imagine that ( real or imagined) benefit outweighting solving distributed transactions.

Why are you getting hung up on nomenclature? The point of the article is clear. If you feel that using 'microservices' is too trite or "buzzword-y" then that's about you and not the article.

I guess you're agreeing with me sarcastically? Very funny.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com