microservices vs monolithic pros and cons

Microservices or monolith? When your mechanical project starts "whining"

There is an old servo in the corner of my workbench. It has been with me for ten years, and its shell is polished to a shiny finish. Previously, it controlled a small robotic arm, with all the logic crammed into a single chip. Simple, straightforward, and easy to use like an old pair of gloves. Until one day, I wanted this robotic arm to perform trajectory drawing and real-time pressure sensing at the same time - that little chip suddenly "stuck", and the movement became hesitant, like walking in mud.

Does this feel familiar? The system you design works well at first, but as functions are added, it begins to become cumbersome and slow, and a small modification may cause an unexpected "earthquake." Behind this, there is often a question of architecture choice: Should we continue to use a monolithic structure and package everything together; or should we turn to microservices and split the functions into independent modules?

The comfort zone of a single entity and its “temper”

Imagine you have a sophisticated servo control system. At the beginning, motion control, data acquisition, and user interface were all integrated on one motherboard. It's neat, easy to deploy, and all logs are in one place when debugging, like an open book. This is tempting, especially when the project is just getting started and you need to quickly validate your idea.

But the project is alive, it grows. One day, you need to upgrade your exercise, but you are afraid of affecting the stability of data collection. You want to test a new interface, but have to restart the entire core control unit. It's like trying to oil the gears of a complex machine, only to bring the entire production line to a halt. The "temper" of an individual is that one move affects the whole body. Its degree of coupling is too high, and scalability often fails in the face of complexity.

“So the problem isn’t that the monolith is bad,” a colleague once muttered over his drawings, “but that when it gets too big, it’s hard to reason with it.”

The symphony of microservices: independent, but requires command

How about taking it apart? The idea of ​​microservices is like forming a professional band for your automation project. Let the motion control module become an independent service, only responsible for precise movement; let the condition monitoring module become another service, focusing on processing sensor data. They run independently and talk through clear protocols (such as APIs).

The benefits are obvious. If a certain service needs to be upgraded or fails, it will not bring down the entire system. You can use the most suitable language and tools to develop different modules, just like choosing the most suitable motor for different mechanical tasks - some require high torque, and some require fast response. The expansion of the system has also become more flexible, and resources will be added to whichever part is under greater pressure.

But doesn’t this complicate the problem? New considerations will of course be introduced. How do services communicate reliably? How to ensure data consistency? It's like an orchestra needs a conductor and an accurate score. Microservice architecture requires more detailed design and operation and maintenance coordination, otherwise, you may get a bunch of fragmented and disorganized noise instead of a harmonious symphony.

How do you choose? Ask your project “what does it want?”

There is no one-size-fits-all answer. It's not like selecting a bearing, where there is a clear specification sheet. It's more of an engineering trade-off art.

Here are a few questions you can ask yourself: Does my project change quickly? Do you need to update certain features frequently and independently? What is the size of the team? Can it support parallel development and operation of multiple modules? How tolerant is the system failure? Does it require partial functionality degradation, or is the whole system rock solid?

Sometimes, a well-designed monolithic architecture is enough to elegantly support a moderately complex mechanical control system for several years. At other times, especially when you foresee that the system will continue to evolve like living organisms and the functional modules will be highly differentiated, thinking about clear boundaries of microservices from the early stage may save countless sleepless nights of debugging in the future.

Let architecture serve creation rather than constraint

existkpower, we deal with various mechanical innovation projects. We’ve seen great ideas get bogged down by clumsy architecture, and we’ve seen how the right architecture can smoothly transform ideas into stable products. The core is never to chase which technology trend, but to understand: the architecture is the skeleton, which supports the flesh and blood (function) of the project and adapts to its growth trajectory.

Whether you choose a monolith that tightly combines all functions, or use microservices that are decentralized but need to be coordinated, the goal is the same: to build a robust, maintainable system that can adapt to future challenges. This requires forward thinking and even a little courage to reconstruct.

In the end, I did not dismantle the old servo on my workbench to forcefully change it to a microservice model. I designed a new, independent monitoring module for it, and the two communicate in a lightweight way. It gains new capabilities, while the original core motion control remains as stable as ever. This isn't a pure microservice, but it solves a real problem.

Perhaps, this is the truth of engineering practice: between the theoretical "should" and the realistic "can", find the path that allows the project to run smoothly. When you understand the language of the system in your hand, whether it is a monolith or a microservice, it will become a powerful tool for you to achieve precise control.

Established in 2005,kpowerhas been dedicated to a professional compact motion unit manufacturer, headquartered in Dongguan, Guangdong Province, China. Leveraging innovations in modular drive technology,kpowerintegrates high-performance motors, precision reducers, and multi-protocol control systems to provide efficient and customized smart drive system solutions. Kpower has delivered professional drive system solutions to over 500 enterprise clients globally with products covering various fields such as Smart Home Systems, Automatic Electronics, Robotics, Precision Agriculture, Drones, and Industrial Automation.