Microservices vs. Monolith

As technology continues to evolve rapidly, the debate between microservices and monolithic architectures remains a hot topic in the realm of DevOps.

Sebastian Orellana DevOps Specialist

While both architectures have pros and cons, choosing one over the other is crucial and often determines the success of a software project. This post will dive into an insightful exploration of both architectures from a DevOps perspective, comparing their essential characteristics and the impacts they have on development, deployment, and scalability.

The two giants: Understanding microservices and monolith architectures

Before delving into the comparison, it’s crucial to understand what microservices and monolith architectures entail.

Monolithic Architecture: In a monolithic architecture, all the application’s features and services are tightly interwoven and managed as a single unit. While this architecture offers the ease of development and testing due to its singular nature, it also poses challenges. A failure in one part of the system could cause the entire application to falter, and deploying updates or new features can be time-consuming and risky.

Microservices Architecture: Conversely, a microservices architecture breaks down the application into several independent, loosely coupled services, each with its own database and bounded context. Each service can be developed, deployed, scaled, and updated independently, providing flexibility and reducing risk. However, managing such architectures requires complex coordination, and the distributed nature of services introduces challenges such as network latency and data consistency.

DevOps: Bridging the architectural divide

DevOps — a blend of ‘Development’ and ‘Operations’ — strives to enhance collaboration between developers and IT operations teams, promoting faster, more reliable software releases. The choice between microservices and monolithic architectures significantly impacts DevOps processes. Let’s see how:

1. Development & Testing:

In a monolith, developers and testers work on a unified codebase. It allows easy end-to-end testing but may slow down development as the application grows. With microservices, teams can work independently, accelerating development. However, the testing becomes complex due to service dependencies and asynchronous communication.

2. Deployment & Scalability:

Deploying a monolith involves replacing the entire application, which can be cumbersome and risky. Microservices can be individually deployed and scaled based on demand, which benefits large-scale, high-traffic applications. However, managing deployments across numerous services can be challenging.

3. Failure Isolation:

A critical drawback of monolithic architecture is that a single error can bring down the entire system. In a microservices architecture, failures are isolated to individual services, reducing system-wide risk. However, it requires robust error handling and fault-tolerance strategies.

4. Technology Stack:

A monolith usually has a homogeneous technology stack, limiting opportunities for using the best tools for different tasks. On the other hand, each microservice can employ a technology stack best suited for its purpose, allowing teams to experiment and innovate.

“Monolith of microservices”

A vital principle of a microservices architecture is that each service should be independent, able to be developed, deployed, and scaled separately from the others. This allows teams to work on different services simultaneously, speeds up deployment, and prevents a failure in one service from bringing down the entire system.

However, in some cases (more often in the last years 😂), what begins as an attempt to implement microservices can end up creating a “monolith of microservices”. This happens when the services are designed and developed in a way that they become tightly coupled. That means they heavily rely on each other for functionality and cannot operate independently.

For example, if changes in one service necessitate changes in others, or if a failure in one service causes others to fail, this indicates a high level of coupling and a failure to properly implement the principles of microservices.

In essence, a “monolith of microservices” is a microservices architecture gone wrong. It has the complexity and overhead of a microservices architecture, but without the benefits of independent deployment and scalability, and with the drawbacks of a monolithic architecture, such as lack of modularity and resilience.

To avoid creating a “monolith of microservices” it’s essential to focus on proper service boundaries, avoid shared databases, implement robust API versioning, and ensure each service can be deployed and operate independently.

How do I make the right choice?

There isn’t a one-size-fits-all answer when it comes to choosing between monolithic and microservices architectures. Factors such as team expertise, project scale, business requirements, and resource availability play a vital role.

For startups or smaller applications, a monolithic architecture might make sense due to its simplicity and ease of management. As the application grows and demands more flexibility and scalability, transitioning to microservices may be beneficial.


Understanding the impacts of architectural choices on DevOps processes is vital for successful software development and delivery. Whether you choose a monolithic or microservices architecture, the goal remains: building robust, scalable, and maintainable software. As technology advances, we’ll likely see further innovations in architectural paradigms — and the DevOps community will be right there, ready to adapt and evolve.

This discourse barely scratches the surface of the vast monolith vs. microservices debate. As we dive deeper into each aspect, we’ll continue to explore, learn, and innovate, propelling the DevOps movement forward. The future, as they say, is exciting. Are you ready for the ride?

Related articles

We think these articles might be interesting for you as well.