Evaluating Scalability and Modularity: A Comparative Study of Traditional Software Architectures

Monolithic software architectures are increasingly being replaced by microservices architectures due to their modularity, scalability, and flexibility. While monolithic systems package all components into a single deployable unit, microservices consist of independently deployable components, each responsible for a specific functionality. Despite the growing popularity of microservices, many organizations adopt architectural styles based on trends or anecdotal success stories, often without a comprehensive understanding of their benefits and trade-offs.

This research aims to provide empirical data comparing the performance, scalability, and resource efficiency of monolithic and microservices architectures under varying levels of load. The evaluation utilized the Spring Petclinic application, deployed in both monolithic and microservices configurations. A series of controlled test cases were executed on a local machine, and performance metrics were gathered using Apache JMeter.

The results indicate that the monolithic architecture outperformed the microservices configuration in terms of throughput, latency, and resource utilization under most load conditions. While microservices demonstrated lower error rates at minimal load levels, they exhibited significantly higher error rates under peak load, primarily due to service failures resulting from limited CPU and memory resources. These findings suggest that microservices architectures, although promising in scalability, require more robust infrastructure and careful orchestration to perform effectively at scale. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on software architecture by providing quantifiable insights into when and how to adopt specific architectural paradigms based on system requirements and available resources.