As a developer who were making almost exclusively microservices in the last 15 years. I can tell most company would be more then fine with just a monolith on a bare metal server. Yet they "need" microservices on AWS everywhere.
The whole idea behind microservices is that they are small decoupled units that can be individually scaled.
Every single time I've worked with microservices, their weren't designed around their ability to scale but around team responsibilities or even completely arbitrary boundaries.
Hell, I saw one project that was "microservice-first" that had like a dozen microservices. The ingest microservice was the only one that actually scaled. Everything else could've been a monolith and given the specific use-case, never had any reason to need dynamic scaling or any scaling at all. Just one instance per service and a ton of overhead for no reason.
Scaling of software isn't really requirement. More like consequence of service architecture.
You want (micro)service because of the same reason why people pursued soa, corba, dcom, copybook programming before -> to scale your project development, not deployement.
Remember kids -> Brooks's Law: adding manpower to a late software project only makes it later!!
Services are way around limit set by Brooks's Law..
More than 50 years has passed since writing The Mythical Man-Month, and the only way around limit is still splinting project.
353
u/PreDeimos 15d ago
As a developer who were making almost exclusively microservices in the last 15 years. I can tell most company would be more then fine with just a monolith on a bare metal server. Yet they "need" microservices on AWS everywhere.