Microservices vs. monolithic apps – Key differences and use cases

Intro

When you are running a tech company, one of the main pressures you may experience is adapting quickly to the constantly changing demands of the market. In this case, you are often required to build and maintain flexible, scalable, and resilient systems. 

To attain this flexibility, companies often use microservices architecture. This way, they structure their applications as a collection of independent, modular services. When paired with the robust ecosystem of AWS, businesses can transform their digital infrastructure with confidence.

In this guide, the mobile team at Touchlane provides perspectives into the basic pillars of microservices, highlights the benefits they bring to contemporary solutions, and explains major differences between microservices vs. monolithic apps.

Microservices architecture explained

Microservices architecture is a design method where software is built using small, self-sufficient components. Each separate service focuses on a specific function and interacts with external services via well-defined APIs. This contrasts with monolithic apps, which bundle all components into a single codebase.

Key characteristics include:

• Modularity. Engineers design and roll out services separately, which minimizes dependencies.
• Scalability. To provide efficient resource allocation, individual services can scale based on demand.
• Resilience. A failure in one of the services is isolated, which reduces the risk of system-wide downtime.

This architecture aligns well with businesses aiming for adaptability, quicker time-to-market, and more precise resource control.

Benefits of microservices for modern apps

Accelerated timelines
Independent services mean development teams are able to collaborate concurrently without relying on updates or alterations in other sections of the application. This speeds up product releases and feature updates.

Scalability for custom needs
Instead of expanding the application’s scope, microservices support targeted expansion of components based on usage patterns. Such an approach increases the overall cost efficiency of the project. 

Improved fault isolation
If one service experiences an issue, the rest of the application remains unaffected, improving reliability and user experience.

Flexibility in technology choices
Teams can opt for the ideal tools for each service to foster innovation and improve problem-solving.

Support for modern development practices
Microservices align with DevOps and CI/CD practices. This boosts the synergy between development and operations teams.

Common use cases for microservices 

Employing microservices is particularly effective for large-scale apps that need to increase capacity or support a bigger range of functions. Microservices architecture works particularly well for applications, where scalability and reliability are critical. 

In addition, microservices are useful when companies need to integrate with various external systems, or when rapid updates to multiple parts of the app are necessary. Such flexibility supports businesses in responding quickly to market changes or customer demands.

For instance, in fintech, a digital banking app can separate services like user authentication, transaction processing, account management, and fraud detection into distinct microservices. This setup allows each service to operate independently and makes it easier to handle high transaction volumes during peak times. It also supports faster updates like improving fraud detection algorithms without disrupting other services.

Monolithic app vs microservices architectures – Key differences

Structure

A monolithic architecture constructs an application as a cohesive, tightly connected unit. This approach may suit small applications but often proves difficult to expand and maintain as the application scales.

On the other hand, microservices architecture divides the application into modular, standalone units. Each of these units operates autonomously, which allows for updates or scaling without impacting others. This structure offers greater adaptability to business changes and evolving technologies.

Deployment

Monolithic / Applications are deployed as a single unit. As a result, making any change means redeploying the application as a whole. This process can take significant time and involve risks if problems occur.

Microservices / Each service operates independently, which makes it possible to introduce updates and changes more frequently without affecting others. This approach aligns with continuous integration and deployment practices.

Scalability

Monolithic / Scaling a monolithic application often involves replicating the entire system, which can waste resources because some components may not need to scale at the same time.

Microservices / Microservices support scaling individual services as needed to allocate the resources effectively. This focused strategy improves performance during peak loads.

Development complexity

Monolithic / Monolithic architectures may be easier to develop initially, but they become cumbersome as the codebase expands. The tight coupling of components complicates the management of large applications as they evolve.

Microservices / Microservices require more upfront planning and coordination but allow cross-functional teams to develop different services simultaneously, speeding up development cycles and improving code maintainability.

Fault tolerance

Monolithic / A failure in any part of a monolithic application can take down the entire system. 

Microservices / Microservices offer greater fault tolerance. If one service fails, the remaining services can operate independently. 

Technology stack flexibility

Monolithic / These apps are typically restricted to a single technology stack, which makes adopting new technologies challenging without substantial refactoring.

Microservices / Each microservice can use distinct programming languages and databases based on its requirements. 

To sum it up, monolithic architectures are tightly integrated, which makes them harder to scale and maintain. They are also usually confined to one tech stack. Meanwhile, microservices are modular and more adaptable. They offer easier scaling, deployment, and fault tolerance, as well as allow for diverse technology stacks.

Conclusion

Microservices facilitate selective scaling, integration with emerging technologies, and improved operational efficiency, especially if you compare a traditional monolithic app vs. microservices architecture. They help speed up product releases and isolate faults, as well as remain flexible in technology choices. 

If you need an experienced tech partner to handle microservices, our mobile team at Touchlane has the right expertise to guide you through the complexities of the technology. Contact us to discuss how microservices can fit your development goals.