Timeline for answer to Upstreaming microservices errors by Samuel
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2017 at 18:20 | vote | accept | mpmp | ||
| Jun 17, 2017 at 13:10 | comment | added | Laiv | It's different if the OP is just integratating a 3rd party service. Then, there's no alternative. Implementing synchronous calls among services is the easier implementation but doing so, you are just implementing a monolith in hardcore mode. You will get all its headaches and none of the benefits. | |
| Jun 17, 2017 at 13:05 | comment | added | Laiv |
By dividing into microservices early, you can more easily adopt an asynchronous approach later if you need it. this is a false statement which anybody who has worked with trully MS architectecture, would disagree with. To move from one paradigm to the other is anything but simple and easy. The OP is implementation anything but a MS application. One reason is the lack of architectural components for inter-comunication support. The second is that Service A is so dependent of B that both are tightly coupled technically and operationally.
|
|
| Jun 17, 2017 at 1:11 | history | answered | Samuel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |