Scalable Architecture vs Microservices in System Design Interviews

Free Coding Questions Catalog

Boost your coding skills with our essential coding questions catalog. Take a step towards a better tech career now!

In system design interviews, you'll often discuss how to design systems that scale.

Two common approaches are scalable architecture and microservices. Scalable architecture usually refers to designing a system (often a single, monolithic application) that can handle increased load by scaling up or out as needed.

In contrast, a microservices architecture breaks a software system into a collection of small, independent services communicating over a network.

Interviewers commonly ask you to compare these approaches or discuss when to use each, to assess your understanding of their trade-offs.

Understanding Scalable Architecture

What is a Scalable Architecture?

In system design, a scalable architecture often starts as a monolithic application designed to grow as demand increases.

In simple terms, it’s an architecture that can handle increasing users or workload by adding more resources rather than requiring a redesign.

Key Principles for Scalability:

Vertical Scaling (Scale Up): Adding more capacity (CPU, RAM, etc.) to a single server to improve its performance. This is easy to do but has hardware limits.
Horizontal Scaling (Scale Out): Adding more server instances to share the workload, thereby increasing total capacity.
Load Balancing: Using a load balancer to distribute incoming requests across multiple servers so no one server becomes overloaded.
Caching: Caching involves storing frequently accessed data in memory to serve requests faster, which reduces load on the database.

Advantages:

A monolithic architecture is simpler to develop, test, and deploy since all components are in one codebase.

It also offers efficient performance because calls between components are in-process (no network overhead).

Challenges:

It’s difficult to scale or update specific parts of a monolithic app independently – you often have to scale the entire application even if one feature is the bottleneck.

Moreover, any small change requires redeploying the whole application, making updates slower and introducing risk that a bug in one module could affect everything.

Learn more about horizontal vs. vertical scaling.

Understanding Microservices

What are Microservices?

Microservices architecture is an approach to build an application as a suite of small services, each an independent component with its own business logic and database.

These services communicate with each other through networks (via APIs or messaging) to collectively deliver the application's functionality.

Key Principles of Microservices:

Single-Purpose Services: Each service is responsible for one specific functionality, allowing independent development and deployment.
Communication via APIs: Services interact over the network through well-defined APIs or messaging protocols (instead of in-process calls).
Decentralized Data: Each service manages its own database or data store, so data is decentralized. One service’s data changes won’t directly impact other services.

Advantages:

Microservices are highly scalable – each service can be scaled out independently based on its load. They also improve resilience, because a failure in one service is less likely to crash the entire system.

Development can be more agile as different teams can work on different services in parallel and deploy updates continuously.

Challenges:

The trade-off is increased complexity. With many moving parts, it's harder to manage deployment, monitoring, and debugging across dozens of services.

Inter-service communication over the network adds overhead and latency, and it requires careful design to handle failures gracefully (e.g., retries, timeouts).

Scalable Architecture vs. Microservices (Comparison Table)

Aspect	Scalable Monolithic Architecture	Microservices Architecture
Scalability	Scale the entire application as one unit; cannot scale components independently.	Scale individual services on demand; each service can be scaled separately as needed.
Complexity	Lower complexity – a single codebase and simpler ecosystem to manage.	Higher complexity – many moving parts and services to coordinate.
Maintainability	Straightforward early on, but as the codebase grows it becomes tightly coupled and harder to modify without side effects.	Each service is modular and easier to update or replace independently, improving long-term maintainability.
Reliability	A bug in one module can potentially crash the entire system.	Fault isolation improves overall stability – one service failure is less likely to bring down the whole app.
Cost	Cost-efficient at small scale (minimal infrastructure and operations overhead).	May incur higher initial overhead (many services to manage), but can be more cost-effective at scale by only scaling necessary services.

Find out more about microservice vs monolithic architecture.

Choosing the Right Approach in System Design Interviews

When faced with a system design question, deciding between a monolithic vs. microservices architecture comes down to the scenario. Some guidelines:

Use a monolithic (scalable) architecture when... the system is simple, small-scale, or early-stage. A monolith keeps development and deployment straightforward with minimal overhead. For example, a small or medium application with tightly coupled features and infrequent updates is ideal for a monolithic design.
Use a microservices architecture when... the system is large, complex, or needs to scale to a high volume of users. If an application has many distinct components or a very large user base, microservices can be beneficial. For example, Netflix found they had to break their monolithic system into microservices to handle growing demand at scale. Microservices shine when different parts of the system have different scaling requirements or update cycles.
A balanced strategy: Often, the best approach is to start with a monolith and modularize it well, then move to microservices for specific bottlenecks as the system grows. Adopting microservices too early can introduce needless complexity. In an interview, explain the trade-offs of each option and justify your choice based on requirements. Show that you can adapt the design as needs evolve.

Final Thoughts

In summary, neither a scaled monolithic architecture nor a microservices architecture is universally "better" – each has its strengths and weaknesses.

Monoliths offer simplicity and faster development, whereas microservices provide greater scalability and flexibility at the cost of complexity.

In system design interviews, always tailor your solution to the requirements and clearly explain the trade-offs behind your choice.