{"id":15427,"date":"2023-11-25T15:40:08","date_gmt":"2023-11-25T14:40:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.architecturemaker.com\/?p=15427"},"modified":"2023-11-25T15:40:08","modified_gmt":"2023-11-25T14:40:08","slug":"when-not-to-use-microservices-architecture","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.architecturemaker.com\/when-not-to-use-microservices-architecture\/","title":{"rendered":"When Not To Use Microservices Architecture"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

The Microservices Architecture is becoming increasingly popular. Developed from the Service-oriented architecture, this approach splits the application into smaller and independent services. In theory, this enables smoother deployment, scalability and allows for customizing of the product. But when should it not be used? Here we will analyze when it might not be the preferred architecture, and other approaches that can be better.<\/p>\n

On a practical level, there are a few drawbacks to using the Microservices Architecture. Firstly, there is complexity due to the many moving parts. Each of the services must be written, tested and managed separately, which requires an ample and competent DevOps team. Moreover, deployments can be more challenging due to the number of components and services. Moreover, there are distributed systems vulnerabilities to bear in mind and a need for a service mesh to handle service-to-service communication.<\/p>\n

The computing power and resources needed to use the microservices architecture are also a factor. Smaller services require higher numbers of instances, which can be expensive. Similarly, the network latency and setup time required for all the components can be lengthy. All this means that, depending on the product, the microservices approach may not be ideal.<\/p>\n

In terms of scalability, there are other approaches that can be more suitable. For example, Cloud Computing provides a solution. The advantages of this approach include the ability to easily scale and to use cloud services that offer high availability, like Kubernetes, Amazon EC2 and Azure. Moreover, the architecture is simpler and requires fewer components. Similarly, the benefits of ‘bin packing’ or ‘auto-scaling’ can be a better solution.<\/p>\n