Simple Systems Have Less Downtime

Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by jayd16 on Tuesday March 03, 2020 @01:43PM (#22477475)

In my experience you do end up having external dependencies and more than one service. You do end up breaking out some code into special instance types, (high ram for video processing or what have you). These are problems you do have and do have to solve so you might as well come up with a plan. Deploying microservices really isn't that hard once you make it routine, imo.

But what do I know? I would not have expected Instagram to run things like user login on the same instance as photo upload and processing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by chrismarlow9 on Tuesday March 03, 2020 @02:50PM (#22478120)

microservice vs monolithic is a shade of grey. what if all the code is in one codebase, but distributed to varying instance types that use some config flag to say the role it plays in that context. is that monolithic or microservice? I'd say the code is monolithic and the architecture is microservices. So it's some hybrid version.

what you're talking about (isolation of responsibilities) can be done and still be considered monolithic. you can also use the exact same instance type for everything and still be considered microservice.

I think what we're really talking about is containers vs machine images. And personally I think containers right now are suffering from the same abuse/hype that datastores suffered like redis/mongo/couch etc. Sure they have an application and solve problems, but they're being over used to the point of causing technical debt.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Simple Systems Have Less Downtime by papito on Tuesday March 03, 2020 @10:26PM (#22480957)

It doesn't mean that they do. Their system is partitioned to a point, and something like image processing is very easy to offload and expose via HTTP, for sure.

[ Parent | on HN ]