Talk:Monolithic application

Very low quality article
The article lacks proper references and has a down view of the concept instead of explaining what it is. The article is also very focused on explaining what modules are and why they are good, getting out of the topic. I would go a step forward and say that this article has wrong information.

Edit: Please elaborate which information is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redyaung2003 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Single-tiered
I'd argue that a monolithic system could be milti-tiered. If each one of those tiers is only used by one higher-level tier and the higher-level tier cannot function without that one-and-only lower-level tier, you have a monolithic system. --PeterRitchie (talk) 17:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

There seems to be the need to distinguish between a Monolithic Application and a Monolithic Architecture.

In the context of Microservices there are many references to Monolithic Systems that are layered and component based. Consider this reference from the Microservices page which refers to a "a monolithic, layered system."

Martin Fowler describes the Monolith as usually having three layers:

"To start explaining the microservice style it's useful to compare it to the monolithic style: a monolithic application built as a single unit. Enterprise Applications are often built in three main parts: a client-side user interface (consisting of HTML pages and javascript running in a browser on the user's machine) a database (consisting of many tables inserted into a common, and usually relational, database management system), and a server-side application." }

Also consider this pattern description on Microservice.io:

"The application has either a layered or hexagonal architecture and consists of different types of components"

--Ged Byrne —Preceding undated comment added 13:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Monolithic application. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://itc.fgg.uni-lj.si/projects/icci/glossary.cgi/Show?bda1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070902151937/http://www.its.state.nc.us/Information/Glossary/Glossm.asp to http://www.its.state.nc.us/Information/Glossary/glossm.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Re: "Modularity"
The claim that traditional ("monolithic") applications lack modularity sounds like sales-talk and painting with too wide a brush. Classes, methods, functions, etc. are tools of mudularity they usually have. What they may lack is "inter-application" modularity. It's roughly comparable to claiming I am not "friendly" because I am not friendly to my neighbors. However, I may still be friendly to relatives and co-workers.

Related, there are trade-offs to increasing inter-application modularity: it's rarely a free lunch, as implied. Inter-application modularity is not a new concept nor new technology. Using it is a matter of balancing engineering and support trade-offs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.233.255.211 (talk) 18:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)