The Microservices Hype Problem
Too many teams adopt microservices because "Netflix does it" without understanding why. The result: distributed monoliths that are worse than what they replaced.
Start With a Monolith (Usually)
For most startups and new projects, a well-structured monolith is the right choice:
- Faster initial development
- Simpler deployment and debugging
- Easier to refactor while requirements are unclear
- Lower operational overhead
Signs You Need Microservices
Team Scale Problems
- Teams stepping on each other's code frequently
- Merge conflicts are constant
- Deployment coordination requires meetings
- Different parts of the app need different release cycles
Technical Problems
- Parts of the system need different scaling characteristics
- Technology constraints (one part needs Python ML, rest is Node)
- Fault isolation required (one failure shouldn't take down everything)
Business Problems
- Regulatory requirements for isolation
- Different parts have different compliance needs
- Acquisitions bringing different tech stacks
Signs You're Not Ready
- Fewer than 20 engineers total
- Product-market fit not yet achieved
- No clear domain boundaries
- Team lacks distributed systems experience
- No proper monitoring/observability in place
The Hidden Costs of Microservices
- Infrastructure complexity: Service mesh, container orchestration, API gateways
- Operational overhead: More things to monitor, more things to break
- Development overhead: API versioning, distributed transactions, eventual consistency
- Testing complexity: Integration testing across services
The Modular Monolith Alternative
Before jumping to microservices, try a modular monolith:
- Clear module boundaries within one deployment
- Internal APIs between modules
- Database schema separation by module
- Can extract to services later when needed
Evaluating your architecture options? We help teams make these decisions.