Monolithic vs Microservices: De-risking Software Development

The Monolithic Approach

Historically, software applications were developed using a waterfall approach. This model involved hiring a team of business analysts to create a detailed software specification. A project manager would then break this down into manageable components for software development. This process was often slow, inefficient, and led to high failure rates in the 80s and 90s. The primary reason for these failures was a large gap between the product owner's vision and the actual outcome, caused by time constraints and ambiguity in the software specification.

The agile mentality emerged as a solution to these problems. Agile involves breaking down projects into epics, stories, and tickets, each assigned a story point indicating the complexity and the time each piece would take. This approach allowed for more flexibility in organising tasks and making changes on the fly. However, there was still a significant issue: any minor modification made to the code base required the entire application to be tested - a highly inefficient process. This type of large, complex and singular software design is often described as a monolithic application.

What are Microservices?

This is where the concept of Microservices comes in as a game-changer. Microservices involve breaking down an application into many independent components. Each component can sit on the cloud infrastructure independently and have its own infrastructure strategy. For example, some might need to scale massively, while others remain static. Each of these components, or microservices, essentially acts as an independent part of the application.

A microservice ideally does one thing: it creates and manages APIs, allowing data to be pushed to the next service in the loop efficiently. This approach de-risks the entire platform, as each update is limited to one small component, reducing the scope of testing.

The microservice model also aligns the underlying infrastructure with usage patterns and use cases for the services. If a new service is needed, it can often be cloned from an existing one and upgraded. Containers may run individual microservices or groups of them. They are independent and are part of the architectural strategy for deploying and managing code.

“Now, instead of a waterfall application that has taken years to build with a distant, ever evolving end goal, you have a living, breathing ecosystem of maybe a hundred microservices, all connected with each other via API.”

- Eamus Halpin, COO at Releaseworks

Monolithic vs Microservices

In contrast to the monolithic model, the microservice model de-risks software development a hundredfold, and allows for a more efficient and flexible approach to building software applications, facilitating faster development cycles. It represents a marked shift in software development, providing a solution to many of the drawbacks of the monolithic approach.

While the monolithic model has its place and can be an effective approach for smaller, simpler applications, the microservices model offers significant advantages for larger and more complex systems, making it an attractive choice for many organisations today.