Solving the Problem of Monoliths: Microservices and Domain-Driven Design (Part 1 of 2)

Executive Summary

This 2-Part article introduces Microservices and Domain-Driven Design (DDD) as a method aligning software with business needs using a common language and clear boundaries. It contrasts microservices architecture with traditional monolithic structures, highlighting its scalability, flexibility, and resilience. Additionally, it discusses the integration of serverless computing with containers, emphasizing efficiency, scalability, and cost-effectiveness. This combination of DDD, microservices, and serverless with containers offers a robust framework for developing business-aligned and technically sound software.

Part 2: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/solving-problem-monoliths-microservices-domain-driven-ryan-johnson-jcpjc/

Abstract

This 2-part article provides an overview of microservices architecture, Domain-Driven Design (DDD), and the integration of serverless computing with containers in modern software development.

Microservices architecture, in contrast to monolithic structures, consists of small, independently scalable services. This approach offers benefits in scalability, flexibility, and resilience, and aligns well with DDD through its focus on bounded contexts.

DDD, introduced by Eric Evans, emphasizes aligning software architecture with business needs through a common language and clear model boundaries. Its core principles include Ubiquitous Language, Model-Driven Design, and Bounded Contexts, which facilitate effective communication between developers and domain experts.

Serverless computing, where the cloud provider manages the infrastructure, is combined with containers — standalone packages that include an application's full runtime environment. This combination enhances efficiency, scalability, and cost-effectiveness in software deployment.

One of the big dangers [in software engineering] is to pretend that you can follow a predictable process when you can’t. – Martin Fowler

The Article in 5 Minutes

Let's chat about why you should really get to know microservices, Domain-Driven Design (DDD), and containers. These aren't just buzzwords; they're game changers in the world of software development.

First up, microservices. Imagine building a giant Lego structure. Now, what if you had to change a piece right at the bottom? With traditional, monolithic architecture, that's like disassembling the whole structure. But with microservices, it's like you've built your Lego structure in sections. Need to change a piece? Just tweak that section without touching the rest. That's microservices for you – they break down an application into smaller, manageable parts that work independently. This makes updating, scaling, and maintaining each part a breeze. So, if you're into making your life easier (who isn't?), microservices are your go-to.

Now, let's talk about Domain-Driven Design (DDD). Ever been in a situation where what you say gets lost in translation? DDD is like the Rosetta Stone for software development. It bridges the gap between technical talk and business needs, ensuring everyone's on the same page. This approach helps in creating software that truly aligns with business objectives and user needs. It's about understanding the heart of the business problem and building solutions that are spot on. In a nutshell, DDD helps you build what's needed, not just what's easy.

Lastly, we've got containers. Think of them as compact, self-sufficient packages that contain everything your software needs to run. No more, "But it works on my machine!" problems. Containers ensure that your application runs consistently across different environments. They're lightweight, making them perfect for a fast-paced deployment cycle. Plus, when paired with microservices, containers streamline the development process even further. So, whether you're deploying on cloud or on-prem, containers keep things smooth and hassle-free.

What About the Cloud?

Microservices and cloud computing are like a match made in tech heaven, especially when dealing with the challenges of legacy applications. Here's a high-level view of why they gel so well together:

Firstly, cloud computing offers the kind of flexible, scalable infrastructure that microservices thrive on. In the cloud, each microservice can be deployed, managed, and scaled independently. This means you can allocate resources precisely where and when they're needed, rather than over-provisioning to meet the peak demand of a monolithic legacy system. It's like having a team where each member is free to work on what they do best, without waiting for everyone else.

Secondly, microservices can address many pain points of legacy applications. Legacy systems often suffer from being unwieldy, hard to update, and even harder to scale. By breaking down a legacy application into microservices, you essentially divide and conquer. Each microservice is a small, manageable piece that can be updated more frequently and with less risk. This modular approach also makes it easier to adopt new technologies and practices – you can update or replace one service without reengineering the entire application.

In essence, pairing microservices with cloud computing transforms the way applications are built and operated. It provides a pathway to modernize legacy systems, making them more agile, scalable, and aligned with current business needs. Plus, it opens the door to continuous integration and deployment, which are key to staying competitive in today's fast-paced digital landscape.

Just because people tell you it can't be done, that doesn't necessarily mean that it can't be done. It just means that they can't do it. – Anders Hejlsberg

Section 1: The Problem

Monoliths

Monolithic architectures, where applications are built as single units, present challenges like scalability issues, complicated updates, and increased risk of bugs. Their tightly coupled components make deploying updates risky and hinder the adoption of new technologies, slowing down development and adaptability to market changes or technological advancements.

Understanding Monoliths in Software Development

Definition of a Monolith

A monolith in software refers to a system characterized by a single, large codebase or a unified build process. It represents a unified architecture where various components of the application are interwoven and interdependent.

Challenges of Monolithic Systems

Monolithic architectures face several significant challenges:

1. Testing Difficulty: Testing individual components is complex, as they are not isolated. This necessitates extensive regression testing for any changes.

2. Complex Release Process: Coordinating releases is challenging since all parts must be updated simultaneously. This often requires scheduled downtime and can be hard to achieve.

3. Steep Learning Curve for Developers: Understanding the interactions among various components increases the time required for developers to become productive.

4. Ripple Effect Complexity: Changes in one part of the system can inadvertently affect other areas, leading to unforeseen bugs or issues.

These challenges often lead to a compromise between agility and reliability in software development.

Origins of Monolithic Architectures

The inherent human tendency to gravitate towards creating monolithic systems in software development can be attributed to several factors:

Simplicity in the Beginning: Monolithic architectures are straightforward to start with. When a project is small, it's easier and quicker to build a single, unified application rather than dealing with the complexities of multiple interacting systems. This simplicity is appealing, especially in the early stages of development.

Familiarity and Comfort: Developers and project managers often prefer to stick with what they know. Monolithic architectures, being a long-standing approach in software development, offer a familiar path. This comfort zone can lead teams to choose monoliths over more complex, distributed architectures like microservices.

3. Perceived Cohesiveness: There's a perception that a single, unified codebase is more cohesive and easier to manage. In a monolith, everything is in one place, which can initially make it seem easier to understand and control.

4. Avoidance of Initial Overhead: Setting up microservices or other distributed architectures requires an initial investment in defining service boundaries, setting up communication protocols, and handling distributed data management. This upfront complexity can be daunting, leading teams to opt for the seemingly simpler monolithic approach.

5. Underestimation of Future Growth and Scalability Needs: At the outset of a project, it's often difficult to fully anticipate the future growth and scaling needs of the application. Monoliths can seem sufficient for the immediate needs, and the challenges of scaling and updating a monolithic application only become apparent as the system grows in size and complexity.

The inclination towards monolithic systems is driven by their initial simplicity, familiarity, perceived cohesiveness, avoidance of early complexity, and underestimation of future challenges. However, as projects scale and evolve, the limitations of this approach often become more evident, prompting a shift towards more modular and scalable architectures.

If you can get today’s work done today, but you do it in such a way that you can’t possibly get tomorrow’s work done tomorrow, then you lose. – Martin Fowler

Section 2: Solving the Problem

Microservices

• Microservices are a type of service or application architecture, akin to familiar ones but with distinct characteristics.
• They represent a method for addressing issues and constructing systems in a specific manner.
• Microservices are not a single software or hardware product that can be purchased.
• There are no mandatory design elements to implement or specific ones to avoid in order to classify as microservices.
• The term 'microservices' embodies a guiding philosophy rather than a rigid set of rules or technologies.

Philosophy of Microservices

Microservices represent an overarching philosophy that encourages the following principles:

1. Smaller Services with a Single Responsibility

2. Testable Services, Often Following Test-Driven Development

3. Frequent and Automated Deployments

4. Embracing the "Share Nothing" Approach

5. Ownership of a Complete Product Lifecycle by a Single Team, from Requirements to Support

• "There is no single development, in either technology or management technique, which by itself promises even one order of magnitude improvement within a decade in productivity, in reliability, in simplicity."
• "We cannot expect ever to see two-fold gains every two years" in software development, as there are in hardware development (Moore's law).
• Software Engineering will improve through many innovations, iterative development, good practices and hard work.

Analogous to City Planning

There are a number of practices that we engage in –– no, that we cling to, and defend, and teach to others, – that amount to magical thinking, or at best, rational failure. – Jesse Liberty

Microservices architecture typically displays these key characteristics:

High Cohesion in Components: Similar to assembling a premium stereo system, each microservice:

• Focuses on a singular function, embodying the Single Responsibility Principle.
• Is smaller, simpler, and operates independently.
• Can be individually modified, upgraded, or replaced without impacting others.
• Features straightforward, domain-specific interfaces.
• Business-Centric Organization: Mirroring the structure of the business itself:
• Teams are organized according to business domains and their specific contexts.
• Teams are product-oriented, maintaining involvement beyond the initial launch.
• The DevOps model integrates development, deployment, and ongoing maintenance within the team.
• Smaller teams managing concise codebases lead to increased productivity.
• Operational Autonomy: Moving away from traditional "Big Bang" release models:
• Microservices function independently, each self-contained and self-sufficient.
• They can be modified, tested, and released on their own schedules.
• Interaction with other services is limited to API sharing, keeping implementation details private.
• Ensuring backward compatibility is an ongoing priority.

Designing for Failure: Anticipating and planning for potential failures to ensure robustness and resilience.

Smart Endpoints and Simple Communication: Prioritizing intelligent service design with straightforward communication channels.

Automated Infrastructure: Leveraging automation for infrastructure management to enhance efficiency and reliability.

In essence, microservices are characterized by their focused functionality, alignment with business goals, operational independence, and an emphasis on effective communication and infrastructure automation.

?

Common Misconceptions About Microservices

Misconceptions about What Microservices Aren't:

• Centralized Orchestration, Business Process Management (BPM) Tools, or Overarching 'God' Services
• Usage of Shared Databases Across Multiple Services
• Implementing a Single, Unified Domain Model Across Various Services
• Key Principle in Transitioning to Microservices:
• Avoid transitioning to microservices simply as a solution for disorganized monolithic architectures.
• Essential Precondition for Effective Microservices:
• Proficiency in designing modular systems is crucial before adopting microservices.

A Critical Insight: If achieving modularity in a monolithic architecture is challenging, it will be equally challenging, if not more, in a microservices architecture.

If I have the same logic in two places, I work with the design to understand how I can have only one copy. Designs without duplication tend to be easy to change. – Kent Beck

Design Patterns

Design patterns are essential as they provide proven solutions to common problems in software design, enhancing code maintainability, scalability, and readability. These patterns offer a standardized approach that facilitates efficient and effective problem-solving during software development.

Regarding the relevance of design patterns in microservices and general software design:

1. Object Orientation: This is a foundational programming paradigm, not a specific design pattern, and is applicable across many software architectures, not limited to microservices.
2. Contract-Driven Design: Crucial in microservices, this approach focuses on defining service interfaces before implementation, ensuring clear and consistent service interactions.
3. Publisher/Subscriber Pattern: Widely used in microservices for asynchronous communication, enabling services to publish events or messages without knowing the subscribers.
4. Command Query Responsibility Segregation (CQRS) / Event Sourcing (ES): These patterns are particularly effective in microservices for managing complex data and operations, separating read and write responsibilities (CQRS) and maintaining a historical record of all changes (ES).
5. Facade Pattern: Though a general software design pattern, it's useful in microservices for providing a simplified interface to a group of services, enhancing usability.
6. Adapter Pattern: A general design pattern focusing on making incompatible interfaces work together, not exclusively linked to microservices.
7. Decorator Pattern: A general design pattern used for adding new responsibilities to objects dynamically, not specific to microservices.
8. Reactor Pattern: Relevant in microservices for managing asynchronous I/O, helping services handle multiple concurrent events efficiently.
9. Command Pattern: A general design pattern useful for encapsulating all information needed to perform an action or trigger an event, not exclusive to microservices.
10. Mediator Pattern: While it’s a general design pattern for reducing dependencies between objects, it can be beneficial in microservices to minimize direct communication between services.
11. Strategy Pattern: This general design pattern involves defining a family of algorithms and making them interchangeable, not specific to microservices.
12. Observer Pattern: Applicable in various contexts, this pattern is not particularly associated with microservices. It allows objects to notify other objects about changes in their state.
13. Actor Model: More of a concurrency model than a design pattern, it is advantageous in microservices for high concurrency and scalability requirements.

Any fool can write code that a computer can understand. Good programmers write code that humans can understand. – Martin Fowler

What’s Next?

In part 2 of this article, we will delve into DDD, Serverless Computing, & Containerization. Until then, happy architecting!

Part 2: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/solving-problem-monoliths-microservices-domain-driven-ryan-johnson-jcpjc/

Responsibility cannot be assigned; it can only be accepted. If someone tries to give you responsibility, only you can decide if you are responsible or if you aren't. – Kent Beck