The most accepted transaction strategy for microservices is to avoid using distributed transactions whenever possible. This approach is favored because it aligns with the principles of microservices architecture, which emphasizes loose coupling and high cohesion among services. Instead of relying on traditional transaction mechanisms that can introduce tight coupling and complexity, alternative strategies are employed to handle data consistency and integrity.
Alternative Strategies
Saga Pattern:
The saga pattern is a sequence of local transactions where each transaction updates data within a single service. If one of the transactions fails, sagas ensure compensation actions are taken to revert the impact of the preceding transactions. This pattern can be implemented either through orchestration, where a central coordinator controls the saga execution, or through choreography, where each service involved in the saga emits and listens to events, managing its own transactions and compensations[3].
Compensating Transactions:
This approach involves implementing additional compensatory logic to undo a transaction if a subsequent step in the business process fails. It's a way to maintain data consistency without locking resources across services, thus enhancing resilience and scalability[3].
Eventual Consistency:
Instead of striving for immediate consistency, microservices often use eventual consistency. This model accepts that the system will temporarily be in an inconsistent state but guarantees that it will become consistent over time. This approach is typically implemented using asynchronous communication and event-driven architectures[3].
Two-Phase Commit (2PC):
Although less favored due to its performance impact and complexity, the two-phase commit protocol is sometimes used in scenarios where strong consistency is necessary. It involves a coordinator service that manages all the phases of the transa...
