| > Ah sorry, I guess replying to people supporting microservices Again, at no point did I make an argument for microservices. > that's just SOA Absolutely not, from your own reference: > Each service provides a business capability. Spinning a high memory task off into it's own process is not a business capability. Microservices are more granluar than SOA services, your describing a microservice. > That says exactly nothing. At Netflix scale their most random "trivial" endpoints are easily doing scale that entire SMEs won't ever deal with. You said microservices are for when a microservice would have the support equivelant to a medium enterprise, this is not true even at netflix scale. They absolutely have services owned by very small teams, or else they wouldn't have more than 1000. > When FAANG is your case study in any technical discussion in a public forum, you're default wrong. Well who do we use as a case study on microservices then? > Any useful technical discussion needs... A technical discussion requires nuance, not turning into a black and white one side versus the other. Yes, you can have multiple DBs in a monolith, but you tend not to. In microservices you are basically forced to. It's a crude and expensive way to force modularisation. However, that is still what it often achieves, it gives you infra that you can keep other people away from and lets you be in charge. |