Bird
Raised Fist0
Microservicessystem_design~12 mins

Strangler fig pattern in Microservices - Architecture Diagram

Choose your learning style10 modes available

Start learning this pattern below

Jump into concepts and practice - no test required

or
Recommended
Test this pattern10 questions across easy, medium, and hard to know if this pattern is strong
System Overview - Strangler fig pattern

The Strangler Fig pattern helps replace a legacy system gradually by building a new system around it. It routes user requests to either the old system or the new microservices, allowing smooth migration without downtime.

Key requirements include seamless request routing, data consistency, and minimal disruption to users during migration.

Architecture Diagram
User
  |
  v
Load Balancer
  |
  v
API Gateway
  |
  +--------------------------+
  |                          |
  v                          v
Legacy System           New Microservices
  |                          |
  v                          v
Legacy Database         New Database
  |
  v
Cache
Components
User
client
End user making requests
Load Balancer
load_balancer
Distributes incoming requests evenly to API Gateway instances
API Gateway
api_gateway
Routes requests to legacy system or new microservices based on routing rules
Legacy System
service
Existing monolithic application serving some requests
New Microservices
service
New modular services gradually replacing legacy functionality
Legacy Database
database
Stores data for legacy system
New Database
database
Stores data for new microservices
Cache
cache
Speeds up data access for both systems
Request Flow - 11 Hops
UserLoad Balancer
Load BalancerAPI Gateway
API GatewayLegacy System or New Microservices
Legacy System or New MicroservicesCache
CacheLegacy System or New Microservices
Legacy System or New MicroservicesLegacy Database or New Database
Legacy Database or New DatabaseLegacy System or New Microservices
Legacy System or New MicroservicesCache
Legacy System or New MicroservicesAPI Gateway
API GatewayLoad Balancer
Load BalancerUser
Failure Scenario
Component Fails:Legacy Database
Impact:Legacy system cannot read or write data; requests routed to legacy system fail or degrade
Mitigation:API Gateway routes affected features to new microservices if possible; cache serves stale data for reads; database replication and failover restore service
Architecture Quiz - 3 Questions
Test your understanding
Which component decides whether a request goes to the legacy system or new microservices?
ALoad Balancer
BCache
CAPI Gateway
DLegacy Database
Design Principle
The Strangler Fig pattern enables gradual replacement of a legacy system by routing requests through an API Gateway that directs traffic to either the old or new system. This approach reduces risk by allowing incremental migration, maintaining service availability, and enabling coexistence of old and new components.

Practice

(1/5)
1. What is the main goal of the Strangler fig pattern in microservices architecture?
easy
A. To build all new services from scratch before replacing the old system
B. To merge all services into a single monolithic application
C. To run the old and new systems completely separately without integration
D. To gradually replace parts of a legacy system with new services

Solution

  1. Step 1: Understand the pattern's purpose

    The Strangler fig pattern is designed to replace legacy systems gradually, not all at once.
  2. Step 2: Compare options with the pattern goal

    To gradually replace parts of a legacy system with new services matches the gradual replacement approach, while others describe different strategies.
  3. Final Answer:

    To gradually replace parts of a legacy system with new services -> Option D
  4. Quick Check:

    Gradual replacement = B [OK]
Hint: Strangler fig means gradual replacement, not all at once [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Thinking it replaces the whole system at once
  • Confusing it with parallel running without integration
  • Assuming it merges services into one
2. Which of the following is the correct way to route requests in the Strangler fig pattern?
easy
A. Send requests randomly to either legacy or new system without control
B. Direct all requests to the legacy system until the new system is fully ready
C. Route requests step-by-step from the legacy system to new microservices
D. Stop the legacy system completely before routing any requests

Solution

  1. Step 1: Identify routing strategy in Strangler fig

    The pattern routes requests gradually from old to new components, not all at once or randomly.
  2. Step 2: Match options with routing approach

    Route requests step-by-step from the legacy system to new microservices describes step-by-step routing, which fits the pattern best.
  3. Final Answer:

    Route requests step-by-step from the legacy system to new microservices -> Option C
  4. Quick Check:

    Step-by-step routing = A [OK]
Hint: Route requests gradually, not all or random [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Routing all requests to legacy until full switch
  • Routing requests randomly causing inconsistency
  • Stopping legacy before new system ready
3. Consider this simplified request flow in a Strangler fig pattern:
Legacy system handles requests for features A, B, C.
New microservice replaces feature A.
Requests for A go to new service; B and C go to legacy.
What happens when a request for feature B arrives?
medium
A. It is routed to the new microservice handling feature A
B. It is routed to the legacy system since B is not replaced yet
C. It causes an error because feature B is missing in new service
D. It is dropped and not processed

Solution

  1. Step 1: Analyze routing rules for features

    Only feature A is replaced by the new microservice; B and C remain in legacy.
  2. Step 2: Determine routing for feature B request

    Requests for B still go to legacy system as it is not replaced yet.
  3. Final Answer:

    It is routed to the legacy system since B is not replaced yet -> Option B
  4. Quick Check:

    Feature B not replaced = legacy route = C [OK]
Hint: Unreplaced features stay on legacy system [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Routing all requests to new service regardless of feature
  • Assuming missing features cause errors
  • Dropping requests instead of routing properly
4. A team tries to apply the Strangler fig pattern but routes all requests to the new microservice before it fully supports all features. What is the main problem with this approach?
medium
A. It leads to inconsistent behavior as new service lacks some features
B. It causes downtime because legacy system is stopped too early
C. It improves performance by forcing early migration
D. It simplifies deployment by removing legacy dependencies

Solution

  1. Step 1: Identify issue with premature routing

    Routing all requests early means new service may not handle all features yet.
  2. Step 2: Understand impact on system behavior

    This causes inconsistent or failed responses for unsupported features.
  3. Final Answer:

    It leads to inconsistent behavior as new service lacks some features -> Option A
  4. Quick Check:

    Premature routing = inconsistent behavior = A [OK]
Hint: Route only supported features to new service [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Thinking early routing improves performance always
  • Assuming legacy can be stopped immediately
  • Ignoring feature support gaps
5. You are designing a migration plan using the Strangler fig pattern for a large monolithic app with features X, Y, and Z. Feature X is critical and must have zero downtime. How should you apply the pattern to ensure smooth migration?
hard
A. Replace feature X first with a new microservice and route only X requests there, keep Y and Z on legacy
B. Replace all features at once to avoid partial routing complexity
C. Stop the legacy app and start new microservices for all features simultaneously
D. Keep all features on legacy until new system is fully ready, then switch all at once

Solution

  1. Step 1: Prioritize critical feature migration

    Feature X requires zero downtime, so migrate it first carefully.
  2. Step 2: Apply gradual routing for feature X only

    Route requests for X to new microservice while Y and Z remain on legacy to reduce risk.
  3. Step 3: Avoid full switch or stopping legacy abruptly

    The other options risk downtime or complexity by switching all features at once.
  4. Final Answer:

    Replace feature X first with a new microservice and route only X requests there, keep Y and Z on legacy -> Option A
  5. Quick Check:

    Gradual critical feature migration = D [OK]
Hint: Migrate critical features first, route requests gradually [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Trying to replace all features at once
  • Stopping legacy before new system ready
  • Delaying critical feature migration