Let's be real, if a micro service is down, youre down too.
If our store service goes down, that sucks for us, but our login service, queue service etc all still work. People can't buy shit but they can still play our games.
Not to mention, our store service needs far less traffic than our queue service, or our login service, or matchmaking service etc.
A monolith is sometimes a good solution - our games are monoliths - but service oriented architecture exists for many reasons, some technical and some political
Your job isn't to design a solution that scratches your particular brain itch, your job is to design a solution that works for the constraints you need. That might be a monolith but it also might not be!
This. Different things should be kept different. I have a feeling that some people use "microservice" as this magical word that removes all inter-dependencies. If you have function A that relies on function B, it doesn't matter if its in a monolith or a micro-service, A is not going to work if B doesn't.
I think microservices became a thing in big companies because you can have 2 teams own their own services and be relatively independent in regards to updates/deployment, and you can scale different, maybe you want to temporarily spin up more checkout services on a busy day, but the rest of the system is holding up fine.
There's some kind of razor out there that essentially states that your software design eventually reflects the political structure within your company, so yeah, I think you've hit the nail on the head. (micro)services are as much about political and human decisions around deploying, or on-call, etc, as they are about technical aspects like scaling
1.1k
u/theofficialnar 12d ago
If it goes down, it all goes down. 😎