Choosing between Monolithic and Microservice Architectures: A Quantitative Method for Migration Feasibility and Readiness Assessment
( Pp. 77-90)
More about authors
Lisovoy Andrei A.
postgraduate student; Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba, software engineer
Datanomika LLC
Moscow, Russian Federation Zhiltsov Sergei A. Cand. Sci. (Econ.); senior lectured
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba
Moscow, Russian Federation Andreeva Larisa O. Cand. Sci. (Pedag.); associate professor; Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba; Moscow, Russian Federation
Datanomika LLC
Moscow, Russian Federation Zhiltsov Sergei A. Cand. Sci. (Econ.); senior lectured
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba
Moscow, Russian Federation Andreeva Larisa O. Cand. Sci. (Pedag.); associate professor; Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba; Moscow, Russian Federation
Abstract:
This paper reviews monolithic and microservice software architectures and systematizes conditions for their rational use. The main contribution is a formalized decision-making method for selecting an architectural approach and justifying a migration from a monolith to microservices. The method relies on a weighted multi-criteria assessment and introduces two indices: NeedScore, capturing the architectural need for decomposition, and ReadyScore, reflecting engineering and organizational/infrastructure readiness for operating a distributed system. Criteria weights are derived using the Analytic Hierarchy Process with consistency checking of expert judgments. The paper defines threshold levels for interpreting the indices, a (Need×Ready) decision matrix, and dynamic re-evaluation triggers to account for project evolution over time. A worked example is provided to demonstrate the calculation procedure and result interpretation. The study shows that architectural choice should be driven by reliability, scalability, and delivery requirements while explicitly considering the organization’s engineering maturity.
How to Cite:
Lisovoy A.A., Zhiltsov S.A., and Andreeva L.O. Choosing between monolithic and microservice architectures: A quantitative method for migration feasibility and readiness assessment. Computational Nanotechnology. 13, 1 (2026), 77–90. DOI: 10.33693/2313-223X-2026-13-1-77-90. EDN: MMWNNI
Reference list:
Vorotnikov I.S., Shpak V.V. Evolution of architectural styles in information systems development: From monolithic applications to microservices architecture. Molodoy Ucheny. 2023. No. 50 (497). Pр. 10–14. (In Rus.)
Newman S. Building microservices. N. Vilchinsky (transl. from English). St. Petersburg: Piter, 2023. 304 p.
Abghas Y., Mccaren A., Elger P., Solan D. Decomposition of monolith applications into microservices architectures: A systematic review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 2023. Vol. 49. No. 8. Pp. 4213–4242. DOI: 10.1109/TSE.2023.3287297.
Andrade B., Santos S., Silva A. From monolith to microservices: Static and dynamic analysis comparison. arXiv. 2022. Pp. 1–10. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2204.11844.
Baresi L., Quattrocchi G., Tamburri D.A. Microservice architecture practices and experience: A focused look on docker configuration files. In: IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP). 2022. Pp. 151–160. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2212.03107.
Barroso L., Burrows M., Sigelman B. Dapper, a large-scale distributed systems tracing infrastructure. Google Technical Report. 2010. URL: https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//archive/papers/dapper-2010-1.pdf (data of accesses: 27.02.2026).
Berardi D., Giallorenzo S., Mauro J. et al. Security in microservices: A systematic literature review. Applied Sciences. 2022. Vol. 12. No. 3. Art. 1031. DOI: 10.3390/app12031031.
Di Francesco P., Lago P., Malavolta I. Architecting with microservices: A systematic mapping study. Journal of Systems and Software. 2019. Vol. 150. Pp. 77–97. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.01.001.
Dragoni N., Giallorenzo S., Lafuente A.L. et al. Microservices: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In: Present and ulterior software engineering. Cham: Springer, 2017. Pp. 195–216. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-67425-4_12.
Faustino D., Gonçalves N., Portela M., Silva A.R. Stepwise migration of a monolith to a microservices architecture: Performance and migration effort evaluation. Performance Evaluation. 2024. Vol. 164. Art. 102411. DOI: 10.1016/j.peva.2024.102411.
Hassouna A.B. The Architecture Tradeoff and Risk Analysis Framework (ATRAF): A unified approach for evaluating software architectures, reference architectures, and architectural frameworks. arXiv:2505.00688 [cs.SE]. 2025. Pp. 1–36. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.00688.
Maanonen T. Consumer-driven contract testing for microservices. Master’s thesis. Espoo: Aalto University, 2024.
Merson P., Yoder J. Strangler Patterns. In: Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (PLoP ‘20). HILLSIDE, 2020.
Mishra S., Gregg B. Service level objectives. Site reliability engineering: How google runs production systems. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media, 2016. URL: https://sre.google/sre-book/service-level-objectives (accessed: 27.02.2026).
Saaty T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences. 2008. Vol. 1. No. 1. Pp. 83–98. DOI: 10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590.
Taibi D., Lenarduzzi V., Pahl C. Continuous architecting with microservices and DevOps: A systematic mapping study. Cham: Springer, 2019. Pp. 126–151. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-29193-8_7. (Cloud Computing and Service Science)
Newman S. Building microservices. N. Vilchinsky (transl. from English). St. Petersburg: Piter, 2023. 304 p.
Abghas Y., Mccaren A., Elger P., Solan D. Decomposition of monolith applications into microservices architectures: A systematic review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 2023. Vol. 49. No. 8. Pp. 4213–4242. DOI: 10.1109/TSE.2023.3287297.
Andrade B., Santos S., Silva A. From monolith to microservices: Static and dynamic analysis comparison. arXiv. 2022. Pp. 1–10. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2204.11844.
Baresi L., Quattrocchi G., Tamburri D.A. Microservice architecture practices and experience: A focused look on docker configuration files. In: IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP). 2022. Pp. 151–160. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2212.03107.
Barroso L., Burrows M., Sigelman B. Dapper, a large-scale distributed systems tracing infrastructure. Google Technical Report. 2010. URL: https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//archive/papers/dapper-2010-1.pdf (data of accesses: 27.02.2026).
Berardi D., Giallorenzo S., Mauro J. et al. Security in microservices: A systematic literature review. Applied Sciences. 2022. Vol. 12. No. 3. Art. 1031. DOI: 10.3390/app12031031.
Di Francesco P., Lago P., Malavolta I. Architecting with microservices: A systematic mapping study. Journal of Systems and Software. 2019. Vol. 150. Pp. 77–97. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.01.001.
Dragoni N., Giallorenzo S., Lafuente A.L. et al. Microservices: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In: Present and ulterior software engineering. Cham: Springer, 2017. Pp. 195–216. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-67425-4_12.
Faustino D., Gonçalves N., Portela M., Silva A.R. Stepwise migration of a monolith to a microservices architecture: Performance and migration effort evaluation. Performance Evaluation. 2024. Vol. 164. Art. 102411. DOI: 10.1016/j.peva.2024.102411.
Hassouna A.B. The Architecture Tradeoff and Risk Analysis Framework (ATRAF): A unified approach for evaluating software architectures, reference architectures, and architectural frameworks. arXiv:2505.00688 [cs.SE]. 2025. Pp. 1–36. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.00688.
Maanonen T. Consumer-driven contract testing for microservices. Master’s thesis. Espoo: Aalto University, 2024.
Merson P., Yoder J. Strangler Patterns. In: Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (PLoP ‘20). HILLSIDE, 2020.
Mishra S., Gregg B. Service level objectives. Site reliability engineering: How google runs production systems. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media, 2016. URL: https://sre.google/sre-book/service-level-objectives (accessed: 27.02.2026).
Saaty T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences. 2008. Vol. 1. No. 1. Pp. 83–98. DOI: 10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590.
Taibi D., Lenarduzzi V., Pahl C. Continuous architecting with microservices and DevOps: A systematic mapping study. Cham: Springer, 2019. Pp. 126–151. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-29193-8_7. (Cloud Computing and Service Science)
Keywords:
monolithic architecture, microservice architecture, advantages, disadvantages, scalability, migration, software architecture.
