Should You Switch to Microservices? Evaluation Tips and Migration Steps

1. Monolithic Architecture

Monolithic applications are quick to develop and validate ideas, saving resources and costs in the early stages of a project.

However, as business complexity grows, monoliths suffer from reduced flexibility: IDE overload, scaling limitations, deployment conflicts, single‑technology stack constraints, poor extensibility, and limited high‑concurrency handling.

Monoliths are best suited for early‑stage projects where simplicity, cost‑effectiveness, and rapid delivery are paramount.

2. Microservice Architecture

Microservices support massive user traffic, large‑scale device connections, multi‑region deployment, and unlimited server scaling, making them the preferred choice for most internet companies.

Adopting microservices incurs higher technical thresholds (service registry, discovery, authentication, monitoring, tracing, governance), increased complexity, a shift in development mindset, and higher upfront costs.

Typical microservice layers include:

Client layer (mobile, web, IoT devices, etc.)

API Gateway (service registration, discovery, auth, rate‑limiting, circuit‑breaker)

Microservice cluster (business services such as user, order, metadata, message services)

Event Bus (decoupling via message queues like RabbitMQ)

Effective microservice adoption hinges on proper service boundaries and managing service sprawl.

3. When to Adopt Microservices?

Experts advise starting with monoliths for startups or small teams; only consider microservices when the system reaches a scale where monoliths hinder productivity and reliability.

Typical signals include:

Team size approaching 100 developers

Business complexity and rapid growth

Frequent deployment conflicts and stability issues

At this point, splitting into services can improve development velocity and operational stability.

3.2 Landing Conditions Evaluation

Before transitioning, assess the added architectural complexity, required resources, talent pool, and technology stack (DDD, CI/CD, distributed systems, load balancing, CAP theorem, caching, DevOps, containerization).

Choose a landing approach:

Engage external consulting firms for demos and training.

Hire experienced personnel to build and internalize the architecture.

Regardless of the path, ensure sufficient technical talent for ongoing maintenance.

3.3 Risks of Migrating to Microservices

Extensive code rewrites due to architectural changes.

High complexity and steep learning curve.

Backend developers need deep expertise in microservice principles and tooling.

Collaboration with external partners can extend timelines.

3.4 Reasonable Splitting Strategies

Two common splitting methods:

Vertical splitting : Divide by business domain, grouping closely related functionalities into a service.

Horizontal splitting : Separate cross‑cutting concerns (e.g., metadata, messaging) into independent services.

Proper service boundaries reduce future refactoring costs.

4. SOA vs. Microservices

SOA focuses on centralized integration of applications, while microservices emphasize decentralized deployment, code reuse, and automation.

5. Summary

Key takeaways:

“Distributed systems principle: avoid distribution when possible.”

There is no silver bullet; microservices require solid infrastructure automation.

Adopt simple, appropriate, and evolutionary architecture principles to guide decisions.