Microservices may appear to be an obvious solution to the problems that plague legacy monoliths. After all, who wouldn’t want to lower the cost of change while increasing endurance and scalability?
The issue is that decomposing monoliths into microservices is a time-consuming and complicated process. It’s hard to know where to start. Microservices can help to streamline change in the long run, but they don’t always make it simple. You risk losing impetus and becoming mired in a brand new, dispersed quagmire.
Although most software teams understand the benefits of dividing a monolithic application into separate, loosely coupled microservices, the majority fail in their attempts to move people’s existing applications. The following are some tips or approaches these teams can try to split unruly monoliths into manageable microservices.
1. Establish a Baseline for Application Architecture
To dismantle a monolith, you must first understand what it contains. Separate the extant monolith’s structure by logical parts, such as namespaces, at the beginning of any microservices project.
Individual classes do not need to be relocated. If you begin cherry-picking and claiming that these classes will be good microservices, these other classes will follow, and the cycle will never end.
First, grasp the broad components of the monolithic application. This discovery necessitates the participation of both IT and business teams. The software team, for instance, can compile a list of APIs, but it still requires insight from business stakeholders on what they truly use in the application and the significance of those APIs.
A company can save money on zombie occurrences and boost performance by examining the existing state of the app and conflating it with actual usage. It’s possible that all you require is a better monolith, which is light-years ahead of a microservices architecture.
What exactly do you have? What is being utilized and how is it being utilized? That is the first step toward stability.
2. Refactor Into a Design That Is Driven By Domain
Evaluate the size of the namespaces recognized as future services to move toward microservices. If any of the pieces in the architecture accounts for more than ten percent of the application system, it should be broken down into smaller pieces.
Because code volume differs from developer to developer, this is premised on statements and not lines of code. After you’ve divided namespaces of approximately equivalent size, look for “hills,” which are collections of increasingly precise namespaces. Deflate these hills by reallocating classes to lower levels, removing unnecessary namespaces, and creating new groupings as required. When in doubt, keep larger groups together; you can always separate them later.
The monolith is ultimately logically transcribed to services, with namespaces arranged by domains and subdomains. It’s been modularized. We recommend a minimum of four domains and a maximum of twelve domains per application.
Check the correlations between these parts next. Less reliance means less work. Leave specific parts out of the preliminary microservices migration if they are tightly coupled. Consider the option of redoing existing code instead of refactoring the entire program if most or all of the parts are highly interdependent.
Dependency visualization is also important for establishing preferences within the microservices venture. A lot of migrations from monolith to microservices fail due to a dearth of a dependency map.
We suggest renaming any namespace in a domain that is organized differently than the others as you refactor code. For instance, each namespace in the app’s shipping domain must be labeled shipping X.
Before refactoring this modular design monolith code into microservices, take precautions to protect users from interruption and to make sure that no critical business applications are unavailable during the process. Make sure that all changes are reversible and that there are no data issues. There are several techniques that software teams can rely on including the following:
- Disentangle the presentation logic and place it in a remote UI that has API access.
- Set up proxy servers between services and consumers of API
- Construct facades.
- Instead of cutovers, publish new code with dark launches and toggles.
The monolith is no longer uncharted waters once the UI is detached from the app’s functions and the code is organized into easy-to-understand domains and inter-dependencies. It’s easy to use and modular. Many companies can stop right here and still benefit from increased agility, implementation rates, and test-ability.
3. Build Microservices
Begin your work at the positions in the app where microservices will gain the most – preferably, where containerization, DevOps, and automation already exist. If at all possible, focus on a high-change but a low-risk part, such as customer-facing, non-financial capabilities. Using the techniques mentioned above, such as dark launches, teams increase their chances of being able to refactor without negatively impacting the user base.
To develop microservices, pinpoint functional pieces of code that can stand on their own, map the related data, and find specific interfaces. Developers and architects must take into account all three factors when deciding where to split or centralize services.
Choose whether to prioritize re-usability or precision when managing microservices. The more you make it to meet someone’s requirements, the less reusable it becomes.
Some companies are concerned about repetition in the development of microservices, whereas others are fine with a large number of copies and replicas as long as they interface regularly.
Microservices architects should re-evaluate and improve the application composition on a regular basis. Refactoring microservices is not a one-and-done project. This will continue until you drop dead or the projects are terminated.
Conclusion to the Top Decomposing Monolith Approaches
These three approaches have proven successful in helping software teams dismantle monoliths into microservices.
To be successful, don’t make too many promises at once. Actively involve business stakeholders since microservices may necessitate the purchase of new equipment, software, IT tools, and personnel. Cross-functional teams that work collaboratively in an open manner and enforce a strong CI/CD pipeline are required for effective microservices development and implementation. It is one of the keys to successfully decomposing monoliths into microservices. Contact us to gain further strategies and assistance in the top decomposing monolith approaches.
Further blogs within this Top Decomposing Monolith Approaches category.