How System-Level and Application-Level Work Together ?
About
In real-world software systems, System-Level and Application-Level architectures are not competing choices - they operate at different layers of decision-making and complement each other.
Think of it like city planning vs. building architecture:
System-Level Architecture is the city plan - it decides how different buildings (applications/services) are laid out, connected, and scaled.
Application-Level Architecture is the building design - it defines how each building (application) is structured internally to meet its purpose.
System-level architecture decides the shape of the system: how many deployable units exist, how they communicate (HTTP, gRPC, events), how they scale, and how they’re operated (deployments, observability, resilience).
Application-level architecture decides the shape of each unit: how its code is organized, where business rules live, and how the unit keeps infrastructure concerns at arm’s length.
System-Level Focus
Scope: Entire distributed system or product suite.
Decisions Involve:
Service boundaries (Monolith vs Microservices)
Deployment model (Serverless vs Containerized)
Communication style (REST, messaging, event-driven)
Scaling approach (horizontal/vertical)
Analogy: Deciding whether the “city” will have a single skyscraper (Monolith) or multiple smaller buildings connected by roads (Microservices).
Application-Level Focus
Scope: The internal structure of a single application or service.
Decisions Involve:
Code organization (Layered, Hexagonal, Clean, etc.)
Dependency flow and boundaries
Testing strategy and maintainability
Technology independence
Analogy: Deciding how rooms, wiring, and plumbing are arranged inside a building to make it functional and maintainable.
How They Interact in Practice ?
Choose System-Level Style First
Start by defining how the overall system will be composed and deployed.
Example: Decide between Monolith, Microservices, Serverless, or Event-Driven.
Apply Application-Level Style Within Each Unit
Once the system-level unit is decided, design each application using an appropriate internal architecture.
Example:
Microservice → Use Hexagonal Architecture to isolate core logic.
Monolith → Use Modular Monolith with Clean Architecture principles.
Consistency vs. Flexibility
You can use different application-level styles for different components of the same system.
Example:
A reporting service might use Layered Architecture (simple).
A payment service might use Hexagonal Architecture (complex integrations).
Evolution Over Time
The System-Level style can evolve (Monolith → Microservices) while keeping Application-Level architecture consistent within services to ease migration.
Example Mapping Table
Monolith
Layered, Modular Monolith, Clean
Microservices
Hexagonal, Clean, Onion
Serverless
Hexagonal (for function orchestration), Lightweight Layered
Event-Driven
Hexagonal, Modular Monolith, Microkernel
Last updated