MicroService Architecture

5. What I Found in 2004 ✦ 1M locs ✦ 2,000 tests ✦ 70% success rate on Acceptance Test was Acceptable ✦ Bug database with over 1000 entries ✦ Still being changed ✦ New tests almost non-existent Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 5

12. Solution: Pub/Sub e d ✦ Events “published” c t ✦ ✦ Interested applications “subscribe” j e Applications then “publish” interaction requests ✦ R e UI elements render appropriate interactions Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 12

15. From: CAT Scan About: Jane Doe e d Urgency: Time: 23 Apr 2012 20:13:45 Concern c t Summary Validity: 26 Apr 2012 20:13:45 j e Only relevant until... R e Information “Nuggets” Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 15

16. 2005: Services for Investment Management p e ✦ Prototyping new system architecture t y o ✦ Baysian Service Principles (Jeff Bay) t ✦ It’s okay to run more than one version at the same time ✦ ✦ r o You can only deploy one service at a time Decoupling result: Deploying 3 times a day! P Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 16

17. 2006: Batch Processing Replacement Orders ✦ Client needed to replace parts on cars ✦ Many variations based on car, location of car ✦ Vendor estimated 15- months 18 ✦ Unacceptable to business Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 17

20. ? Addr ? ? ? ? d Join Table e •Need VIN •Need zzz •Inject aaa r ks e e v e i w •Need Addr •Inject Name l e 9 D •Need Name •Need rrr •Inject VIN i n Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 20

21. New Observations and Revelations ✦ Services are like Classes ✦ Small, crisp conceptualization ✦ Services got very tiny (100 loc) ✦ Smalltalk message passing perfect for services ✦ Encapsulation ✦ Database segregated among services w/o sharing ✦ Service publishes conclusions, not raw data Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 21

22. New Problems and Challenges d ? ✦ “WTF is going on ?” r e ✦ ✦ Cycles, lost packets Needed to redefine tracking, logging v e ✦ Inexperienced team in defining services ✦ l Approach compromised in Release 2 i ✦ D e Won award at TW Tech Day... for being a bad idea! Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 22

25. 2007: Forward Needs to Monitor AdWords Accounts e d t ✦ Pub/sub model based on Linda Spaces (tuples) Segregate databases to services c ✦ Define agent services for each user e ✦ Start to automate activities and recommendations j ✦ ✦ Off-shore for implementation ✦ ✦ solution R e CTO killed it (former Oracle executive) Replaced with a more traditional, SQL DB-driven Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 25

26. 2008: CardWall e d ✦ Front-end automated Card Wall in Agile e r ✦ Back-end emerged as a set of services analyzing data i v l ✦ One service, one role ✦ ✦ D Migrated to Hadoop Cluster as it grew e Post alerts (with recommendations) to users Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 26

27. New Observations and Revelations ✦ Services became disposable ✦ Loosely coupled via RESTful Json packets or DB ✦ Albeit still knowledgeable about flow ✦ Self-monitoring services replaces Unit Tests ✦ Business monitoring replaces Acceptance Tests ✦ Services language-agnostic Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 27

35. Data Ecosystem Producers Kafka Consumers Postal Address App R App Hive Service Email Address Monitoring Web Server URL Request Apps/ 3rd Party Services Name Web Hooks Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 35

38. Agile Best Practices Not Used Trust w ✦ Stand ups collocation ✦ Unit tests ✦ Story narratives ✦ Acceptance tests Small, ✦ Retrospectives ✦ Refactoring short-lived ✦ Estimates ✦ Patterns apps Results, ✦ Iterations not blame ✦ Continuous integration ✦ Mandatory pairing Continuous deployment Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 38

41. Summary Principles of µServices ✦ Very, very small ✦ Loosely coupled (including flow) ✦ Multiple versions acceptable (encouraged?) ✦ Self-execution monitoring of each service ✦ Publish interesting “stuff” (w/o requirement) ✦ “Application” seems to be poor conceptualization Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 41

42. “Living Software” System ✦ Long-lived system; short-lived services (human body) ✦ Extremely dynamic with continuous deployments ✦ 5- minutes between deployments typical 10 ✦ Accept it is complex (especially for testing) ✦ Acceptance test on business outcomes instead ✦ Radical impact to processes (Anarchy) ✦ There will be a learning curve for developers! Copyright © 2012 by Fred George. All rights reserved. 42

MicroService Architecture

MicroService Architecture

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot(20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked(7)

Similar to MicroService Architecture

Similar to MicroService Architecture(20)

More from Fred George

More from Fred George(9)

MicroService Architecture