A Comparison — Monolithic services v/s Micro services
With every building having an important and integral step to have
architecture, it is equally important for a software build to have a different
architectural style and technique.
Initially, a software was developed keeping appropriate data structure in
mind. Developing algorithms were made using the concept of “separation of
concern”. However, the revolution of giving an architectural structure
approach had its genesis in the 1970s. Later, in 1990 it began to be popular.
The term “software architecture” however, is relatively newer in the industry.
Let’s have a look at it in brief!
Considering Architectural designs, various types and kinds come into
one’s mind, especially if you are one among the developers. Some of the most
popular ones being: Blackboard, Client-Server, Data-Centric, Event Driven,
Micro Services, Monolithic Services, and several others. Most of the ones
mentioned here are relatively newer architectural structures which gained
popularity due to the complexity in the technology. However, Monolithic
services and Micro services are the two architectural designs that are relatively older than the rest of the bunch mentioned.
Micro Service Architecture:
One of the most used architectural methods of developing a software in
the form of a suite is Micro services. In the structure, each service runs in a
unique process. The communication within happens via a well-defined
protocol and serves the purpose it is designed for.
A major function of this is to split the application into smaller sets,
interconnected sets. That is to say, it isn’t a single network but is a
combination of smaller networks. It is advantageous since it improves the
modularity of an application based on the architecture. It translates into being
easy to understand, test the application and deploy as necessary. It enforces
and enables smooth parallelism. These are most widely used designs.It’s acceptable to say that Micro Service Architecture is a slice of Monolithic
Service. While considering the given facts, let us also see the advantages of the architecture.
Pros of using Micro Service Architecture:
Micro service architecture minimizes complexity.
It enforces the development of each service
Micro services do not limit in the choice of technology.
Suiting to the requirement, technology can be used
Continuous deployment is plausible considering the complexity of the
application and its requirements
Every single Micro service is smaller than you think.
It will limit faults to particular instances where the fault is and would not
damage or crash the entire service.
Given the fact that every coin has two sides, let’s consider the disadvantages
and drawbacks of Micro Service Architecture.
Cons of using Micro Service Architecture:
It is complex to implement considering the fallacies to be accounted in
Inclusive of a partitioned based database; requires to use an even more
challenging approach — eventual consistency based approach.
Difficult to make changes in multiple services.
Deploying is complex with reference to Micro services.
Synchronizing large services is challenging. Each service having its own
runtime reduces efficiency, execution time, delay and so on.
Monolithic Service Architecture:
In comparison to Micro Service Architecture, monolithic service is
logically a modular architecture. This service is a single packaged service, unlike the micro services where the service is a combination of various networks. It means that various micro services combine and make one monolithic application.
Monolithic Service Application is single tired software. The user interface in
this architecture is a single piece of program combined with the data access
code. Both of these are written usually on one single platform.
Unlike the micro service architecture, Monolithic Service architecture is an
independent application. There are various advantages to the architecture.
Let’s have a brief look.
Pros of using Monolithic service architecture:
An important advantage is that while using monolithic service
architecture, applications having large cross-cutting concerns can be
reduced in a single package.
Logging, rate limiting, and security features and related concerns are
usually reduced given the single-package advantage of the Monolithic
Easy to hook up components of cross-cutting concerns while everything
runs from the same application
With advantages, the drawbacks and disadvantages are equally important to
be considered. Some of them are:
Cons of using Monolithic Service Architecture:
Monolithic Service Architecture has a huge limitation with reference to
size and the complexity involved.
Large and complex applications make it difficult to understand and make
the required quick and accurate changes for smoother functioning.
The larger the size of the application, slower the start-up time.
Redeploying the entire code on each update becomes necessary
With the failure in one code, it is inevitable that the entire code will
Excessive manual testing is required since it is difficult to understand the
effect of any particular change.
Monolithic Applications become low on reliability with even one bug.
It is difficult to accept newer technologies with Monolithic applications.
To summarize, building complex applications is inherently difficult and
exhaustive. Monolithic service architecture will suit better for simple and
lightweight applications. There are contradictions and comments on
whether or not to opt for monolithic service architecture first before others!
Some suggest it could be opted, while some resort to not opt it for initial
usage! Seeing the need and requirement of your software while the building
will help you to decompose it later into smaller and sub-program. This will
benefit in making it easier to construct complex applications.
Micro service architecture is generally considered to be the most reliable
approach in order to build and handle a complex system. In the process of
doing so, nonetheless, Micro service Architecture introduces us to its own
set of complexities and challenges. This enforces us to fix it to make the
application more user-friendly, and increase its efficiency and reliability. Lest
to say, while deploying a simple code or application, Monolithic Approach
shows the best results.