diff --git a/content/reviews/books/reactive-microservices-architecture.md b/content/reviews/books/reactive-microservices-architecture.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fcfe9a0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/reviews/books/reactive-microservices-architecture.md
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
++++
+title = "Reactive Microservices Architecture - Jonas Bonér"
+date = 2020-02-20
+
+[taxonomies]
+tags = ["books", "reviews", "it", "microservices", "jonas boner"]
++++
+
+[GoodReads Summary](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/29630482-reactive-microservices-architecture):
+Still chugging along with a monolithic enterprise system that’s difficult to
+scale and maintain, and even harder to understand? In this concise report,
+Lightbend CTO Jonas Bonér explains why microservice-based architecture that
+consists of small, independent services is far more flexible than the
+traditional all-in-one systems that continue to dominate today’s enterprise
+landscape.
+
+<!-- more -->
+
+{{ stars(stars=1) }}
+
+Not actually a "book" per se, but more like a paper -- the author even
+mentions it is a paper.
+
+Now, is it a good paper? Well... Thing is, easy-to-explain concepts, like
+"Sagas", take a long discussion about them, but hard-to-explain, like the CAP
+theorem, make just some short explanations. And this is bad; things that
+really need more explanation do not and are just glossed over; things that you
+can get right out of the bad, do not. Also, some parts put a lot of footnotes
+and assume the reader will read the footnote, which is bad, 'cause if you let
+it to read later, you won't totally grasp what it means.
+
+Also, there is one serious problem: Although it does a good discussion about
+microservices, there is is very little explanation on what the reactive
+microservice differs from normal microservices.
+
+It's more interesting for the footnotes, which have links to the real content,
+than the content of the paper.