Top 5 Most Used Architecture Patterns

Software

architecture

is to applications what foundations are to buildings. If you build it wrong, no matter how nice it looks, it will fall apart. In today's discussion, we will look at some prevalent software

architecture

patterns

that form the backbone of countless applications and platforms we interact with on a daily basis. In the next few minutes, we'll explore five key

patterns

that have shaped the industry. Let's start with the layered architecture. This pattern separates the components of a system into different layers, typically the presentation layer, the business logic layer, and the data access layer. For example, in user interface design, we often see the Model-View-Presenter (MVP) pattern.

It is a specialized form of layered architecture. Here, the model represents data and business logic, the view displays this data, and the presenter serves as a bridge to ensure a clear separation of concerns. The main goal of layered architectures is to promote separation so that changes in one layer do not negatively affect the others. This structure provides abstraction and encapsulation, and each layer has a different responsibility. Next is the event-driven architecture. This pattern promotes the production and consumption of events between loosely coupled services and software components. Components broadcast events when something notable happens, and other components subscribe to specific events that interest them.

This allows for highly decoupled architectures. A prominent example in this domain is Command and Query Responsibility Segregation (CQRS). With CQRS, data write operations (commands) are separated from read operations (queries) and changes are often communicated through events. This makes the system inherently event-driven. The pub/sub model, in which components publish and subscribe to events, is commonly

used

in this type of architecture. Here, the components do not call each other directly; they simply react to published events. Moving on to microkernel architecture. This pattern emphasizes the separation of core system functionality into a small microkernel and extended functionality into plug-ins or plug-ins.

In operating systems, for example, a microkernel could oversee vital tasks, such as interprocess communication, while offloading other system functions to external components. An example application is the Eclipse IDE: its core runtime handles the plugin architecture, and features from Java tooling to Git integration are delivered as plugins. This design prioritizes extensibility, ease of maintenance, and fault isolation. Whether it is an operating system component or an Eclipse plugin encountering a problem, the core system remains stable and is not affected. Then we have the microservices architecture. This decomposes an application into a collection of small, loosely coupled services. Each service implements specific business capabilities, contains its own data model, and communicates via APIs.

Netflix, for example, uses microservices to handle everything from movie recommendations to billing. This architecture promotes modularization of functionality so that services can be developed, deployed, and scaled independently. Increases agility and allows companies like Netflix to innovate quickly. However, the trade-off is the added complexity of managing communication between services and maintaining data consistency. Last but not least, we have the monolithic architecture. In essence, a monolithic design sees all application components (from data access and business logic to the user interface) bundled into a single code base and executed as a single unit. This approach simplifies development and deployment, making it an option for many startups and smaller applications.

However, it is worth highlighting the rise of the "modular monolith". This approach retains the benefits of a single deployable unit but emphasizes clear modular boundaries within the codebase. This allows for easier maintenance and scalability. It is a middle ground that offers the simplicity of a monolith while paving the way for possible future transitions to architectures such as microservices. Regardless of the approach, many successful platforms start with a monolithic or modular structure before considering more distributed architectures. And there you have it, a quick tour of five fundamental software architecture patterns. The right choice always depends on our specific challenges, requirements and contexts.

So what pattern resonates with you? Leave a comment below and tell us which architectural pattern intrigues you the

most

. If you like our videos, you might also like our systems design newsletter. Covers topics and trends in large-scale system design. Trusted by 500,000 readers. Subscribe at blog.bytebytego.com