I am breaking my Monday- Thursday posting habit because of an important post by Greg Young. Why do I think it is important? Because Greg, in a very convincing way, proves that CQRS scenarios do not imply any additional work compared to classic ones.

I have written about this before (here GB flag and here PL flag) from the perspective of a single DTO object used to display some data. My point was that DTO is only one of the possible solutions to the problem of displaying data and, compared to CQRS, is in most cases not the best one.

How long will it take to convince people that reads and writes are separate responsibilities and should not be backed by a single normalized database? Using CQRS in DDD in not an option. CQRS is a must-have. And even if you don’t name it explicitly, but you model it well, you will end up having in implicit CQRS.

VN:F [1.8.7_1070]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)