Monthly Archives: February 2010

Udi and I agree on probably 95% of what we talk about, one of the places that we have differing opinions is in the use of Event Sourcing I use the term as described previously to mean the rebuilding of … Continue reading →

The largest single benefit about CQRS is when you start running into problems with the CAP theorem. For those who are unaware, the basics of the CAP theorem are that there are three architectural properties that are linked together. Read … Continue reading →

I have to say, I love the reactions to the first post. I also expected them. People arguing about the merits of RDBMS, personal attacks, supporting comments… Its great. A few people did however actually understand the meaning of my … Continue reading →

I am pretty sure I have heard that phrase somewhere else before, no idea who to attribute it to but its a good one. If you are on a green field project and you are using an ORM, have you … Continue reading →

Many people have been getting confused over what CQRS is. They look at CQRS as being an architecture; it is not. CQRS is a very simple pattern that enables many opportunities for architecture that may otherwise not exist. CQRS is … Continue reading →

Someone brought up to me that they commonly hear concerns about persistence ignorance when dealing with a domain that uses event sourcing. The reasoning behind this is that the domain object knows about the events and rebuilds from them and … Continue reading →

I very commonly hear that applying CQRS is in people’s opinions more work that staying with the more classic CRUD based systems they are used to. The main reason for this objection is that the read layer is separated and … Continue reading →

Somewhat recently –I have not been blogging much I know— Udi put up a good post (and long) about Command and Query Responsibility Segregation. One point that Udi brought up is that people have tied together Event Sourcing and Command … Continue reading →