When to Choose Monolithic Architecture and When to Choose Microservices?

In the world of software development, one of the most critical decisions faced by technical leaders and architects is what type of architecture to use: monolithic or microservices-based? Both options have advantages, disadvantages, and scenarios where they shine. In this article, you will understand the key criteria for making this decision, based on typical scenarios organizations face.

What is a monolith and what are microservices?

Before diving into the decision criteria, it is important to understand the difference:

Monolithic architecture: The entire system is built as a single unit. This means that all functionalities (from business logic to user interfaces and the database) are integrated into one application.
Microservices architecture: The system is divided into small, independent services, each with its own logic and data. These services communicate with each other through APIs or messages.

Let's look at an example to understand how the same system is structured with each architecture. Suppose we want to create a product management system that users can purchase from, we would have three main entities: Users, Products, and Payment.

In a monolithic system, these would be entities within the same application and would relate to each other; the application would be a single one, for example sistema_ventas that would contain all the logic and all team members would make changes on this same application.

In a microservices system, those same functionalities would be divided into smaller applications: User would be a microservice managing users, Product would manage products, and Payment another managing payments; there could be others, and even though they are different applications, they would still need to communicate, but this would be through messages, since each would be independent from the others, each having its own database communication, business logic, internal entities, etc.

Both architectures are valid, but their suitability depends on specific factors.

Key criteria for making the decision

Next, we will analyze the most important factors to consider when choosing between monolith and microservices according to the needs and characteristics of your project.

1. Team size

Monolith: Ideal for small or medium teams, where smooth communication and collaboration are easier to manage. In an environment where everyone works on the same code, coordinating efforts is simpler.
Microservices: More suitable for large or distributed teams, as it allows dividing work into separate modules. Each team can be responsible for a specific service, minimizing bottlenecks.

Typical scenario: If your team has fewer than 10 people, a monolith is usually more efficient. For large teams, microservices allow a more effective distribution of work.

2. System complexity

Monolith: Works well for simple or moderately complex systems. Having everything in one unit makes it easier to manage logic and perform testing.
Microservices: Ideal for highly complex systems with multiple business domains that can evolve independently.

Typical scenario: If you are building an application with limited functionalities, a monolith is more suitable. However, if the system includes multiple modules that need to scale or evolve independently, microservices are the best option.

3. Scalability

Monolith: Scaling a monolith involves replicating the entire application, which can be costly and less efficient.
Microservices: Offer more granular scalability, as you can scale only the services that need it, optimizing resources.

Typical scenario: If you anticipate high demand in certain parts of your system (for example, payment processing in an e-commerce), microservices will allow you to scale those parts without needing to scale the entire system.

4. Budget and development time

Monolith: Generally faster and cheaper to develop initially, since it does not require configuring multiple services or complex tools.
Microservices: Although they offer long-term benefits, their initial setup is more costly and complex due to the need to manage communication between services, monitoring, and independent deployments.

Typical scenario: If you operate with a limited budget or need to launch quickly to market, start with a monolith. If you have the resources and time needed to build a robust architecture from the start, consider microservices.

5. Technical experience level of the team

Monolith: Requires less specialized knowledge. It is easier for teams with general software development experience.
Microservices: Demand an advanced level of knowledge in orchestration, monitoring, continuous deployment, and troubleshooting distributed systems.

Typical scenario: If your team has no prior experience with microservices, a monolith will reduce the risk of errors and technical problems. Microservices are more suitable for experienced teams or those that have the possibility to train development staff.

Advantages and disadvantages of each approach

How to make the decision?

The key is to analyze the specific needs of your project and your organization.

Do you need to launch quickly and have a small team? Choose a monolith.
Will your system grow significantly in the future? Consider microservices, especially if the functionalities are independent.
Are your budget and technical experience limited? Start with a monolith and evolve as needed.
Do you operate in an industry with high scalability and resilience demands (such as e-commerce or fintech)? Microservices will be more suitable.

Conclusion

There is no one-size-fits-all solution, and choosing between monolith and microservices depends on multiple factors such as your team size, system complexity, scalability needs, budget, and technical experience. The key is to carefully evaluate your situation and your long-term goals.

Remember that, in some cases, the best approach may be to start with a monolith and migrate to microservices as your system and needs evolve. In the end, the best architecture is the one that balances efficiency, costs, and risks, helping you achieve your business goals effectively.

‍