In the current world, Microservice architecture is slowly pushing out Monolithic. The traditional method has its advantages, as does the modern one. In this article we will try to introduce both of them to help you make your decision.

The world is built in two architectures

Microservices developed in the market just a few years ago but they have already revolutionised the IT field. All the big worldwide successes like Facebook, Google or Netflix use microservices as their new architecture. Why? There are several advantages of this solution, like increased flexibility and scalability of software projects. This is an efficient way to help entrepreneurs with their business development, and the newest surveys show that microservices are being chosen over monolithic architecture more often than ever before. Nevertheless, let’s not forget that the latter one is still the default mode for any application software project. Does this mean that it will and should stay with us in the future? To follow up on the topic of the increasing popularity of microservices, read more about monolithic architecture vs microservices. Here, on the other hand, we will make an attempt to introduce the arguments for microservices’ popularity and superiority.

What are the core differences?

First, let’s try to define a microservice. It is a small service that could be developed within a few weeks, which performs certain functions in a single area of business. To give a clear example, a microservice isn’t the whole CRM system, but may be a function of resetting the user’s password.

There are many reasons why it is worthwhile to go down the same path as the large digital platforms and rely on microservices. Let’s take a closer look at some of them.

First, switching to microservice architecture makes it possible to implement further

functionalities more quickly and follow the newest technologies more easily. You can also choose the areas to use them without needing to make the whole system run on microservices.

According to Conway’s law, an organization’s systems reveal its communication structure. If an organization is composed of many contractors, located in different branches and specializing in different technologies, this is reflected in monolithic code. On the contrary, if the teams get along and work in close proximity with each other, their code will be much more unified. Following these differences, one can conclude that the monolith is not as uniform as it would seem. Working in a microservice architecture, such differences are named and properly organised by using established forms of communication.

Why choose microservices?

The implementation of the new version of a monolith is time-consuming and susceptible to errors. At first glance, some changes might seem completely unrelated, yet they can make the whole system inaccessible to users. In order to prevent this, teams responsible for different parts of the monolith are involved in implementation. Meanwhile, in the case of microservice architecture, the implementation of changes often comes down to the implementation of one or two small microservices. Detecting the causes of possible problems is then much easier. Unlike a troublesome monolith, microservices can be freely implemented many times a day. This makes it much easier to respond to new ideas in the market. Upgrading a monolith is difficult because many changes (e.g., placing the system in a container) have to be done immediately for the whole monolith. A high barrier to making changes often discourages paying down technical debt.

On the other hand, architecture based on microservices naturally enables creating services according to the latest trends. Thanks to establishing the form of communication and separating a given fragment from the monolith, it can be made with the most appropriate technology. When we use microservices, it all becomes easier, e.g., starting the system in the cloud or increasing the range of test coverage on different levels.

What’s also important is that such migration does not force the whole monolith to be broken down into microservices. Only selected fragments can be separated from it, and those which are not worth re-investing in can remain in the monolith. This creates an opportunity to consciously control the level of technical debt. We hope that this article has given you some idea of microservices’ advantages.