What are your thoughts on Amazon Prime deciding to go back to monolithic architecture rather than pursuing with microservices, at least for a specific usage (video monitoring)? I also feel that, in some cases, microservices may not be the best suited architecture. Reference: https://thenewstack.io/return-of-the-monolith-amazon-dumps-microservices-for-video-monitoring/
Sort By:
Oldest
Enterprise Security & Risk Management Architect in Insurance (except health)a year ago
I don't think they were in a true micro-services environment. After reading several articles a little closer it seemed like their general approach to using Lambdas and messaging was just incorrect. The main shift was to remove issues they had with Lambdas bottlenecks on the in-take and processing. Then the switch they made isn't necessarily a monolith either. To mee it looks like they are just recovering from bad architecture.IT Governance Consultant in Governmenta year ago
Microservices have gained popularity due to their potential benefits, such as scalability, flexibility, and ease of maintenance, they may not always be the best fit for every situation. Monolithic architecture is more appropriate, especially when dealing with certain specific usages or functionalities.CTO in Finance (non-banking)a year ago
I always believed that no one architecture solves all problems.Be it monolithic or micro services, it should be chosen based on various factors like scale, complexity, transactional nature , dependencies etc.
Engineering Manager in Softwarea year ago
I don't consider it architecture migration. One of the basic principles of microservice is to define the business boundary as per context. if the decomposition touchdown way deep. In that case, there is a potential chance that an individual service will impact or will get impacted by another service.
So I honestly believe that this was a well thought decision on their end and they would have considered a lot of factors, pros and cons they were willing to take.