Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by coldtea 2436 days ago
>Someone made a change that took down production because of non-deterministic outcomes? How about break out whatever they were changing into it's own service? With proper fallbacks, breaking that part shouldn't take down all of production again.

Yeah, now you'll have 10 interconnected services, 10x the complexity, and everything will have the ability to take down all of large parts of production, plus all the extra pain points of a distributed system...
1 comments
jedberg 2436 days ago
You won't have 10 times the complexity if you are taking a monolith and making each section services. You'll have to same dependency graph, it will just use the network to make calls between them instead of being local.

You'll have added complexity with the network calls, which is why I said it wouldn't be any less work, just different work.

link
coldtea 2436 days ago
>You won't have 10 times the complexity if you are taking a monolith and making each section services. You'll have to same dependency graph, it will just use the network to make calls between them instead of being local.

Merely "use the network to make calls between them instead of being local" will add 10 times the complexity -- you suddenly have a distributed system, latency, delays, parts that can be on or off, de-centralized configuration (which can also get out of sync), and so on.

link
pytester 2436 days ago
>it will just use the network to make calls between them

meaning that you get to throw network and server errors into the mix of things that can go wrong, and you get the fun of tracing failures back 3 hops to a server that decides to take too long to run a process one day and times out a connection downstream.

it's horrible debugging stuff like this.

link