Thank you very much, Mark! Your lessons helped me to fill in gaps in my knowledge about architecture and design. I like your content and books. Your way of describing complex things is impressive.
this pattern is the missing link of architectural evolution. great session. This is a very good concept for transitional architectures, if you have inherited a ball of mudd and need to start somewhere, this is a helpful model. Thanks!
Just attended Neal Ford's session about Software Architecture and as a user of SBA in 5G Network Functions, Many doubts were clarified such as why not go all the way to MSA an stop on SBA, in case of 5G Network functions we have well defined domains, each can be served by a service, hence no need to go to MSA. Also thank you for validating my understanding that this can be intermediate architecture in journey of going towards MSA.
Hi Mr. Richards, love your content and your books. I would like to know how to handle functions that all services need to share. For instance, let's say the industry is laboratories and all services need to get from the user what are the medical insurance for all operations despite the service domain. So, the question is, how or from where all services fetch the list of medical insurance to present to the user? The thing is, if I create a service to perform that kind of shared function I'll incur in doing the distributed monolith. The way I can see, is to create a business library and share it across all services. Is this a good approach?
Thanks Mark for this awsome explanation. I have few Qs 1. In terms of DDD, can we say that , in MSA each service handles a domain independantly while in SBA we logically group domains into 6-12 macro services with shared DB ?. 2. I might be overthinking but , If SBA is steping stone in the journy to MSA , we might have to introduce some practices so that our transformation to MSA becomes easy right ? such as paring DB Schema & Module , inter module dependacnies etc for easy evolution
1. It could, but generally in MSA multiple microservices make up a particular domain, whereas with SBA the service contains the entire domain; 2. Yes, some things make it easier, such as keeping object hierarchies low, reducing code reuse, and trying to reduce semantic coupling of the data.
I have another question: Can we use a mix of architecture styles: For example: A service based arch at the top level but one of the components of services is of a microkernel arch design (with loadable plugins). Is this frowned upon?
With some differences, I see many similarities of SBA with Gartner's PBC (Packaged Business Capability) definition. Some years ago Gartner created the concept of PBC as an business-driven architecture quantum (and possible based on the hexagonal and clean architecture concepts, although they claimed not to be related) in order to hold domain specific Microservices within same Domain, where logic would only be accessible via APIs, Events and potentially UIs via micro-frontends that could be federated. Mark, I'd appreciate your comments on PBCs vs a MacroService concept on the shape of PBCs and how it could relate to SBA - See description of PBCs from one of the co-creators from Gartner, Massimo Pezzini (starting at minute 10:10) ruclips.net/video/_oHqiDWTrAQ/видео.html
Finally got your book About this video, i did not fully understand why it is scoring so low on abstraction, you are separating the services based on domain separation, that's a good use of abstraction, no?
Abstraction is really about contract and protocol abstractions - something middleware does really well, but no so much in service-based architecture, where the protocol and contract must be known. It's also about the use of adapters, something the Microkernel architecture does well through the use of plug-ins. Glad you got my book! Enjoy!
![Megan Thee Stallion - Mamushi (Remix) [feat. TWICE] [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5c0_u9PsrsQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Great content Mark - loving this series!
Keep up the great work.
Thank you very much, Mark! Your lessons helped me to fill in gaps in my knowledge about architecture and design. I like your content and books. Your way of describing complex things is impressive.
Thank you very much. Your English is very clear to me. I'm not good at English but I understand what you talked about. You are hero
Thanks!
Awesome session… I got more clarity about service based vs Microservice architecture style. Thanks.
Your welcome - glad you found it useful.
this pattern is the missing link of architectural evolution. great session. This is a very good concept for transitional architectures, if you have inherited a ball of mudd and need to start somewhere, this is a helpful model. Thanks!
I like that-the missing link of software architecture!
So Helpful.
Thanks
Just attended Neal Ford's session about Software Architecture and as a user of SBA in 5G Network Functions, Many doubts were clarified such as why not go all the way to MSA an stop on SBA, in case of 5G Network functions we have well defined domains, each can be served by a service, hence no need to go to MSA. Also thank you for validating my understanding that this can be intermediate architecture in journey of going towards MSA.
Sounds like you understand all the salient points about service-based architecture!
Hi Mr. Richards, love your content and your books. I would like to know how to handle functions that all services need to share.
For instance, let's say the industry is laboratories and all services need to get from the user what are the medical insurance for all operations despite the service domain.
So, the question is, how or from where all services fetch the list of medical insurance to present to the user?
The thing is, if I create a service to perform that kind of shared function I'll incur in doing the distributed monolith. The way I can see, is to create a business library and share it across all services. Is this a good approach?
I'm planning on doing a lesson on exactly your question - stay tuned in a couple of lessons for that!
Thanks Mark for this awsome explanation. I have few Qs
1. In terms of DDD, can we say that , in MSA each service handles a domain independantly while in SBA we logically group domains into 6-12 macro services with shared DB ?.
2. I might be overthinking but , If SBA is steping stone in the journy to MSA , we might have to introduce some practices so that our transformation to MSA becomes easy right ? such as paring DB Schema & Module , inter module dependacnies etc for easy evolution
1. It could, but generally in MSA multiple microservices make up a particular domain, whereas with SBA the service contains the entire domain; 2. Yes, some things make it easier, such as keeping object hierarchies low, reducing code reuse, and trying to reduce semantic coupling of the data.
I have another question: Can we use a mix of architecture styles: For example: A service based arch at the top level but one of the components of services is of a microkernel arch design (with loadable plugins). Is this frowned upon?
You can absolutely mix architecture styles, and as a matter of fact its very common and encouraged as one architecture style doesn't suit all needs.
You are the best
Thanks for the kind words!
With some differences, I see many similarities of SBA with Gartner's PBC (Packaged Business Capability) definition. Some years ago Gartner created the concept of PBC as an business-driven architecture quantum (and possible based on the hexagonal and clean architecture concepts, although they claimed not to be related) in order to hold domain specific Microservices within same Domain, where logic would only be accessible via APIs, Events and potentially UIs via micro-frontends that could be federated. Mark, I'd appreciate your comments on PBCs vs a MacroService concept on the shape of PBCs and how it could relate to SBA - See description of PBCs from one of the co-creators from Gartner, Massimo Pezzini (starting at minute 10:10) ruclips.net/video/_oHqiDWTrAQ/видео.html
Thank you :)
Glad you found it useful!
Finally got your book
About this video, i did not fully understand why it is scoring so low on abstraction, you are separating the services based on domain separation, that's a good use of abstraction, no?
Abstraction is really about contract and protocol abstractions - something middleware does really well, but no so much in service-based architecture, where the protocol and contract must be known. It's also about the use of adapters, something the Microkernel architecture does well through the use of plug-ins. Glad you got my book! Enjoy!