Monolith

Modularity drivers (availability, scalability, deployability, testability, maintainability); scalability vs elasticity; component-based vs tactical forking; six decomposition patterns; architecture stories

Summary and comparison of all 8 styles; decision guide

All 8 architecture styles rated side by side; decision guide; monolith vs understanding-distributed-systems; partitioning type

Migration for deeply embedded capabilities: 5 steps; feature toggles; verify variant with automatic fallback

How far to decompose: modular monolith → service-based → microservices; five decision factors (domain understanding, team structure, DevOps maturity, transaction requirements, scalability); recommended migration path; granularity disintegrators vs integrators; Ferrari anti-pattern

Eight types of natural split points for monolith decomposition: business domain (primary), regulatory compliance, change cadence, team location, risk, performance, technology (sparingly), user personas; six forms of monolith; distributed monolith anti-pattern

Technical partitioning; simplest monolith; domain layer isolation as the DDD prerequisite; Smart UI anti-pattern; sinkhole anti-pattern; closed/open layers

Core system + plug-ins; single quantum; customisability-focused

Domain-partitioned single quantum; appropriate coupling via fitness function enforcement; intermediate migration step

Filter-and-pipe; technically partitioned; ETL/data processing; EIP treats Pipes and Filters as a messaging composition pattern

*Software Architecture Patterns* — Mark Richards

Incremental migration pattern: identify → implement → redirect via proxy; HTTP/FTP/message variants; UI composition (page, widget, micro frontends); deployment ≠ release; feature freeze