Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dist-epoch 80 days ago
You are taking the article argument too literally. They meant microservices also in the sense of microlibraries, etc, not strictly a HTTP service.
2 comments
iainmerrick 80 days ago
No, I think you’re not reading it literally enough. “Microservices” generally does mean separate HTTP (or at least RPC) servers. Near the beginning, the article says:

A microservice has a very well-defined surface area. Everything that flows into the service (requests) and out (responses, webhooks)

link
mexicocitinluez 80 days ago
I think a better word would have been "modularization" than "microservices" as I also highly correlate "microservices" with http-based calls.
link
prerok 80 days ago
Really? That seems strange, at least to me.

While HTTP can be considered as a transport layer for RPCs between microservices, it seems to me to be a very inefficient and bug-prone solution.

Can you describe a set up where you used HTTP between microservices?

link
anthonylevine 80 days ago
> Really? That seems strange, at least to me.

Are you purposely misreading the comment? Where did it say that http was the only form of communication (or even the best) between microservices? Where did it imply there weren't other methods?

> While HTTP can be considered as a transport layer for RPCs between microservices, it seems to me to be a very inefficient and bug-prone solution.

This is so irrelevant to the point being made it's nuts.

link
benfortuna 80 days ago
Why arbitrarily invent new meanings (for microservices) and new words (microlibraries) when there are already many adequate ways to describe modular, componentized architecures?

A totally valid and important point but it has been diluted by talking about microservices rather than importance of modular architectures for agent-based coding.

link
mexicocitinluez 80 days ago
> describe modular,

Agreed. Modular is what they were probably after.

link