How Small Can Java Microservices Be?
1 like1,756 views
The document discusses the concept of nanoservices and how they compare to microservices. Nanoservices are defined as being smaller than microservices, with independent deployment units that use more lightweight technologies. Examples discussed include Docker containers, AWS Lambda functions, OSGi bundles, and Java EE applications. While nanoservices aim to allow for smaller services and local communication, technologies like OSGi and Java EE have challenges with independent deployment and scaling. Serverless technologies like AWS Lambda provide stronger support for nanoservices through features like independent scaling, isolation, and technology freedom.
Ad
More Related Content
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked (20)
Ad
Similar to How Small Can Java Microservices Be? (20)
Ad
More from Eberhard Wolff (12)
Recently uploaded (20)
How Small Can Java Microservices Be?
- 1. How Small Can Java Microservices Be? Eberhard Wolff Fellow, innoQ @ewolff
- 6. Microservices: Definition > No consistent definition > Microservices are modules > Independent deployment units > E.g. processes, Docker container > Microservice owned by one team
- 7. Microservices: Definition Server / Container Server / Container Micro Service Micro Service
- 10. Online Shop Elasticsearch Spring Batch Oracle Spring MVC MongoDB Order Catalog Search Billing
- 12. Docker > Linux (soon Windows) > Shared kernel > Filesystem just stores diffs > Extremely light weight > Can run in cluster (e.g. Kubernetes, Mesosphere etc)
- 13. Spring Boot > One build file > One Java class > = REST service + embedded Tomcat > Deploy: One Java Fat JARs > Alternatives: Dropwizard, Wildfly Swarm… > https://github.com/ewolff/spring-boot-demos
- 14. Microservice = Fat JAR + Java EE programming model possible!
- 15. Ideal size of a Microservice Team size Modularization Infrastructure Distributed Communication No absolute value! Replaceability Microservice Size
- 16. Nanoservices
- 17. Nanoservices?
- 19. #SRSLY? YES!
- 22. Ideal size of a Microservice Team size Modularization Infrastructure Distributed Communication No absolute value! Replaceability Microservice Size
- 25. Nanoservices use more light weight technologies
- 26. Serverless
- 27. Serverless > Deploy a function > Pay per call > Example: Amazon Lambda > Similar: Google Cloud Functions > Azure Functions > IBM OpenWhisk (Open Source)
- 29. Amazon Lambda > Service in the Amazon Cloud > Allows you to install individual functions > Java, JavaScript, Python
- 30. Amazon Lambda vs. PaaS > Commercial model: Pay-per-call / RAM / processing time > Fine grained (e.g. database trigger, HTTP GET) > First million requests / 400.000 DB seconds FREE! > Can edit Python / JavaScript functions in the browser
- 31. Lambda Function Command Line S3 Event Kinesis Stream DynamoDB SNS: Simple Notification Service SES: Simple EMail Service Cognito CloudWatch CloudFormation API Gateway (e.g. REST) Scheduled Events
- 32. Amazon Lambda adds e.g. trigger to DynamoDB.
- 33. Amazon Lambda + API Gateway = REST services.
- 34. public class Main { public String myHandler(int myCount, Context context) { LambdaLogger logger = context.getLogger(); logger.log("received : " + myCount); return "Hi"+myCount; } }
- 35. Deploy
- 36. Deploy
- 37. Deploy
- 38. Deploy
- 39. Deploy
- 40. Deploy
- 41. Deploy
- 42. Invoke
- 43. Invoke
- 44. Invoke
- 45. Invoke
- 46. Invoke
- 47. Invoke
- 50. Amazon Lambda > Can add any other Amazon Service to complete the system > i.e. Beanstalk PaaS, EC2 IaaS … > Or databased (DynamoDB, RDS...)
- 51. Send out slides via email!
- 52. Lambda Function Simple Email Service SMTP Simple Email Service Event calls Audience Cost: SES 0,10$ per 1000 EMails Lambda free
- 53. > Developed in Python > In the browser > ”Save & test” > Includes monitoring & alarm > Setting up SES was the hardest part…
- 55. OSGi
- 56. OSGi: Bundles > Partition system into – "bundles” > Bundles can be installed, started, stopped, uninstalled and updated > ...at runtime
- 57. OSGi: Code Sharing > Bundles can export and import packages > Updating code requires other bundles to start fresh
- 58. OSGi: Services > Bundles can publish services… dynamically! > Service = Java Object > Service Registry allows other bundles to consume services > Services come and go at runtime > Quite easy with OSGi Blueprints or OSGi Declarative Services
- 59. Calling Bundle Bundle (interface code) Bundle (implementation and service) Service Package (interface code) Package (interface code) Update to service in running application
- 61. Java EE
- 62. Java EE > JARs e.g. for EJBs > WARs e.g. for web application > EARs for JARs and WARs > Completely separated code > …unlike OSGi
- 63. Java EE > Relevant: Deployment model > i.e. application server > Not programming model
- 64. Java EE Nanoservices? > Local calls not possible > No shared code e.g. for interfaces
- 67. Comparison
- 68. Independent Deployment > THE feature of Micro-/Nanoservices > Simplifies to put new features in production > Docker Fat JAR: ++ > Amazon Lambda: ++ > OSGi: + Restart the whole JVM? > Java EE: + Restart the whole JVM?
- 70. Effort per Service > How hard is it to create another service? > All: Create another project/JAR/WAR > Amazon Lambda: ++ > OSGi: ++ > Java EE: ++ > Docker Fat JAR : - (Docker container etc)
- 71. Cost per Service > Hardware, software cost > Amazon Lambda: ++ > OSGi: ++ > Java EE: ++ > Docker Fat JAR: -- (need Docker container etc, separat JVM Heap)
- 72. Local Communcation > Call without network stack > Docker Fat JAR : -- > Amazon Lambda: -- > OSGi: ++ > Java EE: --
- 74. Independent Scaling > Start more instances of a single service > Docker Fat JAR: ++ > Amazon Lambda: ++ > OSGi: ? > Java EE: --
- 75. Isolation > CPU / Memory consumption/crash influences other services > Docker Fat JAR: ++ > Amazon Lambda: ++ > OSGi: -- > Java EE: --
- 76. Resilience & Isolation > Resilience: System can handle crash of other services > Needs isolation > Problem for OSGi/Java EE
- 77. Technology Freedom > Using different technologies > Docker Fat JAR: ++ (whatever) > Amazon Lambda: + (Java, JavaScript, Python) > OSGi: -- (Java) > Java EE: -- (Java)
- 78. Conclusion
- 81. Conclusion > Nanoservice technologies compromise > …to allow smaller services > …to allow local communication > OSGi and Java EE deployment model don’t fully support independent deployment > …might therefore not be “true” Nanoservices
- 82. Conclusion > OSGi and Java EE weak concerning > Independent scaling > Isolation > Technology freedom > Amazon Lambda a lot stronger
- 83. Might also consider… > Vert.x: polyglot, distributed, module concept > Erlang: support update to running system and processes in other languages