We’ve been working with Microservices and Miniservices recently and thought this might be helpful for those looking to understand the differences.

Microservices architecture, a popular architectural style, refers to a system structured as a collection of small, autonomous services, each focusing on a specific business capability.

Microservices can be developed, deployed, and scaled independently, promoting development agility and robustness. This architectural style is often used by enterprises that are looking to evolve their system architectures without impacting their entire system.

Miniservices is a term coined more recently; it’s a bit of a middle ground between monolith and microservices.

Miniservices are larger and encompass more business capabilities than a typical microservice. They’re smaller than a monolith but larger than a microservice, bringing more simplicity in orchestration, communication, and data consistency. It’s a pragmatic approach for teams not ready for the complexity of microservices but still wanting to escape the limitations of a monolithic architecture.

Neither of these architectural styles is “better” than the other – they offer different trade-offs. Microservices might be an excellent choice for large, complex systems where different teams work on different services. In contrast, Miniservices might be better suited to smaller teams or projects where the overhead of managing many tiny services could be counterproductive.

As always, the key is to evaluate your team and project’s specific needs and capabilities, then select the architectural style that best aligns with your requirements and resources.

Remember, one size doesn’t fit all in software architecture. It’s all about choosing the right tool for the right job.

Feel free to share your thoughts and experiences with these two architectural styles.