# Monolith or microservices? An architecture choice guide

> Microservices are popular but not right for every project. The choice of architecture should be made by team size, product maturity and operational capacity. This guide summarises four common approaches and when each fits.

**In short:**

- Increase complexity only when it is really needed.
- For most projects, a well-bounded modular monolith is a strong start.
- Microservices should be justified by independent scaling and independent team needs.
- Monitoring and automation are prerequisites for every architecture.

## Four common approaches

- Monolith: the whole application is built and released as one unit.
- Modular monolith: released as one unit but with clearly bounded modules inside.
- Microservices: the application is split into small, independently released services that talk over the network.
- Serverless: code runs as small provider-managed functions that react to events.

## Monolith: the power of simplicity

For a small team and a product direction that is not yet settled, a monolith is often the fastest and least risky path. There is one release, one database and a simple debugging process. The downside is that separating components can get hard as it grows.

## Modular monolith: a strong middle path for most projects

A monolith that limits dependencies between modules with discipline keeps the way open to split parts into services later if needed. Operational load stays low while code organisation is preserved.

## Microservices: a decision with a price

Microservices are strong for independent scaling and for different teams working independently. In return they bring network latency, distributed data consistency, multiple deployment pipelines and a serious need for monitoring. Moving to microservices early "because we might need it" adds maintenance load for nothing.

## Serverless: for spiky loads

For event-driven and spiky workloads it reduces infrastructure management. Cold-start latency, cost varying with usage patterns and provider dependence should be assessed.

## Questions for the decision

1. How big is our team and how many independent teams will it split into?
2. Which parts truly must scale independently?
3. Can our operations and monitoring capacity carry a distributed system?
4. What is our downtime tolerance (RTO/RPO)?
5. How settled is the product direction?

## Basics regardless of architecture

Whichever approach you choose, automated testing and deployment (CI/CD), infrastructure as code, central logs and metrics, backups with restore drills and secure secret management are indispensable.

## Conclusion

In cloud, API and distributed architecture work, VeriSet A.Ş. first understands the need and increases complexity only as far as required. For more, see our infrastructure area page.

---
https://veriset.org/en/guides/monolith-or-microservices/ · destek@veriset.org