Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • "Replicating of user info to the consuming services should also be kept to the minimum: user id should be sufficient. Anything else should be queried from user identity service" . What if you want to list all agents from the support. Would you do that from supporting ms? Commented Sep 3, 2016 at 7:39
  • 1
    @Robert I don't have the full picture of your service landscape, but yes, it seems logic: support ms is responsible for support, so it's the starting place to find support user ids. If more is needed, more shall be queried to user identity (but this overhead shall not be part of your API: you could perfectly have another ms wondering if one of its own user is also a support user without bothering for the names, email addresses or other identity info). If many of your apps are displaying lists of users and requiring this kind of data composition, you could make this an horizontal service. Commented Sep 3, 2016 at 10:39
  • @Christophe what do you mean by Of course replicating these in the identity service would make query easier, but it would kill benefits of ? Commented Sep 4, 2016 at 8:50
  • @John if you'd replicate all the user types in the identity service, you can query there in one ms all the elements that you are looking for. But then what if two ms have by accident the same naming of a user-type: do you consider it's the same type, or is the type dependent of the consuming service ? And what if one ms considers that a user can have several types ? In fact, you create there a mutual dependency between the identity service and the other services, that will make independent evolution difficult. Commented Sep 4, 2016 at 12:04
  • @Christophe I am just following your first reply. You mentioned it would kill the benefits of MS. I was curious to hear what would be the benefits. In your last reply you provided remarks that all make sense, but could all be resolved with a proper design in one MS ie. identity. Your remark, that if services are decoupled, no inconsistencies should be present (same data, different meaning) is the most important advice here. Commented Sep 4, 2016 at 17:50