Timeline for DDD: Why is it a bad practice to update multiple aggregate roots per transaction?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 16 at 7:58 | comment | added | nicholaswmin | @bdsl Yes, certainly, that's clear | |
| Aug 12 at 12:11 | comment | added | bdsl | "This is the reason since each microservice needs to have it's own database host." One aggregate in this rule refers to one aggregate Instance, not just one type of aggregate. So e.g. two balances of two separate tenants are two separate aggregates and according to the rule should not have to be updated in one transaction. | |
| Jul 13, 2020 at 7:35 | history | edited | Timo | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Clarified intent.
|
| Mar 19, 2019 at 10:14 | comment | added | Timo | @NikKyriakides I disagree with "each microservice needs to have [its] own database host". One context may contain multiple applications that are separate microservices (e.g. an API and a job service). Being in the same context, these could certainly access the same database (so by definition the same host). And even with separate contexts, we just should have separate databases. If the company chooses to host these on the same server, that is fine. I hope this is clear. | |
| Aug 29, 2018 at 15:26 | comment | added | nicholaswmin |
...creates the requirement that they are stored on the same database host. This is the reason since each microservice needs to have it's own database host. I came to this realisation later on. I'll mark this as accepted as this is the correct answer.
|
|
| Aug 29, 2018 at 15:19 | vote | accept | nicholaswmin | ||
| Aug 29, 2018 at 14:49 | history | answered | Timo | CC BY-SA 4.0 |