The document discusses the differences between traditional HTTP architecture and NATS microservice architecture, highlighting the drawbacks of HTTP such as the need for dedicated web servers and issues with load balancing and service discovery. It emphasizes how NATS is lightweight, flexible, and performant, making it more suitable for microservices. The document also outlines benchmark setup and results, considering various NATS strategies and factors affecting performance.

1. NATS vs HTTP
Inter service communication

2. Agenda
● Traditional HTTP Architecture
● NATS Microservice Architecture
● Benchmark setup
● Benchmark results
● Migration Considerations

3. Traditional HTTP Architecture
● Drawbacks:
○ Load Balancing
○ Service Discovery
○ Each service must have a
dedicated WebServer
● Doesn't fit the
microservice model

4. NATS Microservice Architecture
● Fits the new
Microservice
patterns
● NATS is
○ Lightweight
○ Flexible
○ Highly Performant
● It becomes easier to
create microservices
○ Load Balancing
○ Service Discovery

5. Benchmark setup
● Running with Docker
● One Client
● One Proxy
● One Service
● Source code
○ https://github.com/diogogmt/nats-rest-benchmark

6. Benchmark Results
● Each request is
executed serially
● Client times how long
it takes to execute
all requests

7. Benchmark Results
● Client executes
requests concurrently
with a factor of 20%

8. Considerations
● Different NATS strategies
○ Pub/Sub
○ Request/Reply
○ Queuing
● Keep in mind
○ Concurrency
○ Session Management
○ Metadata
○ Message status
○ NATS-Proxy framework
■ Author: Radomír Sohlich
■ https://github.com/sohlich/nats-proxy

9. Questions?
diogogmt.com
@diogogmt