When it comes to developing
software or an app, one of the first questions a company asks is which technical structure to adopt:
microservices or monoliths?
The choice between a monolithic architecture and one based on microservices is not just a purely technical matter, but a strategic decision that can influence timelines, costs, and the ability to scale over time.
It's a crossroads that every CTO or manager faces, and understanding the pros and cons of both options is fundamental to avoiding missteps. There's no one-size-fits-all answer: it depends on where you are today, where you want to go, and what resources you have available.
.
The Monolith: simplicity and speed, but several limitations
A monolithic architecture is a bit like building a house in a single block: frontend, backend, database, and business logic coexist in a single codebase. It's an intuitive approach that appeals to those who want to move quickly.
If you're launching an MVP to test an idea – perhaps an app to manage restaurant reservations or an internal system to track company expenses – a monolith is often the most practical choice
The concrete advantages of the monolith
- Fast time-to-market:
linear development and immediate deployment
- Contained initial costs:
simple infrastructure and fewer tools to manage
- Simpler debugging:
all code is in one place, facilitating troubleshooting
- Ideal for small teams:
less coordination needed between members
The limitations of the monolith
But, as mentioned, monoliths have their limitations, and they become apparent when the project grows. Imagine an app that starts gaining thousands of users: adding new features becomes like renovating a house without being able to close the doors.
A small error in one part of the code can crash the entire system.
And if you want to modernize your technology stack – perhaps switching from an old framework to a more recent one – you often have to face an almost total rewrite.
For a company expecting steady growth or operating in a sector with variable workloads, like an e-commerce site during sales periods, a monolith can become a bottleneck.
Microservices: flexibility and scalability, greater complexity
Microservices take the opposite approach. Here the software is divided into independent modules, each responsible for a specific function: authentication, payments, notifications, search. Each microservice is like a small building in a city, communicating with others through APIs.
This gives you enormous flexibility. If your streaming platform sees a surge in users, you can boost only the video recommendation service without touching the rest.
Or, if you want to experiment with a new technology for part of the system, you can do so without overhauling everything.
The concrete advantages of microservices
- Targeted scalability:
you boost only the services you need, optimizing costs
- Parallel development:
different teams work on different services simultaneously
- Resilience:
if one service goes down, the others continue to function
- Different technologies:
each service can use the most suitable stack
For companies aiming for rapid growth or operating in dynamic markets – think of a fintech managing real-time transactions – microservices are often the natural choice.
The limitations of microservices
This modularity, as you might guess, comes at a price. Building a microservices system is like designing a city rather than a house: it requires more complex infrastructure, with tools like Docker or Kubernetes to orchestrate the various services. This means higher initial costs and the need for a team with advanced DevOps skills.
Communication between microservices must be impeccable, otherwise you risk latency issues or inconsistent data.
And then there's monitoring: with so many moving parts, keeping everything under control requires robust logging systems. For a company that doesn't yet have a significant user volume or operates with a small team, this complexity can be excessive.
.
Three questions to guide your choice
So how do you navigate this? It all comes down to three key questions.
- What are your business objectives? If you want to launch a product in a few weeks to test the market, a monolith gives you speed and simplicity. If instead you're building a platform that will need to grow exponentially or integrate with other systems, microservices offer the necessary flexibility.
- What's your budget?
A monolith requires a more contained initial investment, while microservices, with their more complex infrastructure, weigh more initially but can pay for themselves in the long term through optimized operational costs.
- What type of team do you have?
A monolith is manageable even by a small group, while microservices require specialized skills and good coordination between DevOps, backend, and frontend developers.
Practical cases: when choices make the difference
An example can help clarify.
A logistics startup launched an app to track shipments using a monolith. Initially everything went smoothly:
- the system was simple
- costs were contained
- the app did its job
But when customers went from hundreds to tens of thousands, the system started to slow down.
Every update required days of testing to avoid crashes.
Moving to a microservices architecture made it possible to separate tracking, billing, and push notifications, making the system faster and more scalable without interrupting the service.
Conversely, a marketing agency that developed an app to manage advertising campaigns chose to stay with a monolith. User volume was predictable, features didn't change often, and the team didn't have the resources to manage a distributed system. A sensible decision that allowed them to keep costs low and focus on the core business.
.
Can I use a hybrid approach?
There's also a third way, increasingly common: the hybrid approach or "strangler pattern". You start with a monolith to quickly validate the idea and build the user base.
As you grow, you progressively extract specific features and transform them into microservices.
This approach reduces risk and allows for a gradual transition. For example, you could start by extracting the payment service – which requires high availability and regulatory compliance – while everything else remains in the monolith. Then, over time, you add other microservices as the need becomes evident.
Let's plan your strategy together
a anni lavoriamo con team distribuiti tra Italia e India.
As you'll have understood, there's no magic formula. The key is to plan carefully and, if possible, work with a partner like Huulke who can translate your business objectives into a clear technical roadmap.
Dividing the project into verifiable phases – prototype, development, testing – allows you to test the chosen architecture without risking everything at once.
If you're thinking about your next digital product, take a moment to evaluate what you really need. A conversation with an experienced team can help you understand whether a monolith or microservices are the right path to turn your idea into reality, avoiding costly mistakes along the way
Write to us to understand together which architectural solution can launch your project.
