A great reaction to Martin Fowler’s “microservices” coinage, from Arnon Rotem-Gal-Oz: ‘I guess it is easier to use a new name (Microservices) rather than say that this is what SOA actually meant’; ‘these are the very principles of SOA before vendors does pushed the [ESB] in the middle.’ Others have also chosen to define microservices slightly differently, as a service written in 10-100 LOC. Arnon’s reaction: “Nanoservice is an antipattern where a service is too fine-grained. A nanoservice is a service whose overhead (communications, maintenance, and so on) outweighs its utility.” Having dealt with maintaining an over-fine-grained SOA stack in Amazon, I can only agree with this definition; it’s easy to make things too fine-grained and create a raft of distributed-computing bugs and deployment/management complexity where there is no need to do so.
slightly ruined by the inclusion of some “deliberately Turing-complete” systems
Links for 2014-03-25
permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.. Bookmark the