Author: Gustavo Ribeiro Amigo

It is often said that software developers should create simple solutions to the problems that they are presented with. However, coming up with a simple solution is not always easy, as it requires time, experience, and a good approach. And to make matters worse, a simple solution in many ways will not impress your co-workers or give your resume a boost.

Ironically, the quest for simplicity in software development is often a complex journey. A developer must navigate through a labyrinth of technical constraints, user requirements, and evolving technological landscapes. The catch-22 is palpable: while a simple solution is desirable, it is not easily attained nor universally appreciated. In the competitiveness of software development, where complexity often disguises itself as sophistication, simple solutions may not always resonate with the awe and admiration they deserve. They may go unnoticed in a culture that frequently equates complexity with competence.

The reality of the startup is that engineering teams are often at a crossroads when it comes to choosing the foundational architecture for their software applications. This decision, seemingly technical at its core, extends far beyond the area of coding, straight into the strategic planning that can make or break the early stages of a startup. At the heart of this decision lies a crucial question: should these teams lay the groundwork with a microservice architecture, known for its distributed and decentralized nature, or opt for a monolithic design, where the entire application is unified and interdependent?

The allure of a microservice architecture is understandable in today's tech state of affairs, where scalability, flexibility, and independence are highly valued. The appeal of building a system that's inherently designed to grow and adapt as the startup evolves is undeniable. Microservices promise a distributed architecture where each service runs its unique process and communicates through a well-defined, lightweight mechanism. This approach offers many advantages, particularly in enabling teams to update and deploy individual components without disrupting the entire system.