When companies say they migrated to microservices, they actually mean: Monoliths deployed in a microservices architecture

Without DDD everything is a distributed spaghetti yeah haha

when companies say they migrated to microservices, they acually mean: they took an _existing_ and most of all: working monolith with proper documentation and broke it down into dozens of microservices, none of which work right, is documented, uses the same parameter format, or the same authorisation scheme.

There is a word for that:
Distributed Monolith.

When even one micro service goes down, and the whole system is dead....

I'm in this rant and I don't like it

My team is currently breaking up a service and I don't like it. It is just 5 extra services to maintain with no benefits. No reuse (by other services except these 4), more unnecessary resources, and a lot network overhead (even RPC is considered for some intertwined logic).

Why do we do it then? For clearer boundaries because some fucks can't agree to normal code separation.

Netflix "Oops something went wrong" is the manifestation of microservices.