microservice

Imagine you have a shopping cart microservice, a search microservice, and a users microservice.

It just means that instead of deploying Baker Street as part of your microservice push, you're deploying a) your microservice b) your dual HAProxy setup and/or new HAProxy config and c) DNS.

In the centralized load balancer infrastructure, you end up relying on DNS so that your users microservice can talk to the shopping cart microservice (for example).

With mashups you still have the testing challenge and reliance on another system to be running that comes with a microservice architecture.

A central LB works well if you have just a single microservice.

I think the big problem with the microservice movement is that it is easy to understand but difficult to implement.

I think the pushback can be summarized by the fact that there are more moving parts with a microservice architecture.

We are predominately in the JavaScript/Node.js ecosystem, but have developed a microservice architecture that gives us immense flexibility in our choice of languages and tools.

My main advice to anyone considering writing a microservice based architecture from scratch is to keep a really tight handle on code duplication and testing.

In my mind each microservice is completely decoupled from any other.

NET and Windows to a polyglot microservice architecture on Linux.

I'm also not sure why people keep insisting on using messaging as a way to allow one microservice to communicate to another.

If you're in a microservice architecture, it can be very attractive to "docker run" all the services you're developing against on your development VM.

"polyglot microservice architectures" eh?

That said, I feel the quote should be: "As of 2015, almost all successful microservice stories..." As the tooling and knowledge around microservices builds up over the next few years, I could imagine a world where starting with microservices makes sense.