“Why is our frontend deployment breaking again?”
“Because 5 teams committed to the same monolith... again.” 😩
Sound familiar?
💡 What Are Micro Frontends?
Micro Frontends is an architectural approach where a single frontend app is divided into smaller, semi-independent "micro apps", each owned by different teams and developed, tested, and deployed separately.
Think of it as microservices for the frontend.
🧠 Why Use Micro Frontends?
Imagine if:
- Teams could deploy independently
- Each feature used the best suited tech stack
- Bugs in one area didn’t crash the whole UI
🧭 Types of Micro Frontend Architecture
Micro Frontends can be implemented in different integration strategies:
1. Client-side Composition
Everything comes together in the browser.
Tools: Webpack Module Federation, SystemJS, single-spa
Pros: More flexibility, dynamic loading
Cons: Initial complexity, managing shared dependencies
2. Server-side Composition
Each micro frontend renders on the server, and the final page is assembled there.
Tools: Edge-side includes (ESI), NGINX, SSR frameworks
Pros: Fast time-to-first-byte, SEO-friendly
Cons: Harder to manage dynamic interactivity across parts
3. Build-time Integration
All pieces are built together and deployed as a single app (still independently maintained).
Tools: Module Federation with shared build configs
Pros: Easier setup
Cons: Tight coupling, less runtime flexibility
4. iFrame Integration
Each micro frontend lives inside its own iframe.
Tools: None special, just HTML
Pros: Strong isolation
Cons: Performance, communication overhead
Architectural Constraints & Considerations
Implementing Micro Frontends isn't a free lunch. Here's what you need to keep in mind:
| Constraint | Consideration |
|---|---|
| Isolation | Avoid global CSS, shared DOM access, or clashing dependencies |
| Communication | Use pub-sub models, events, or shared state managers carefully |
| Routing | Who owns the router? Use route-based composition or a central router manager |
| Deployment Strategy | Independent deployments require versioning and compatibility planning |
| Design Consistency | Shared design system / tokens needed for a unified look |
| Shared Dependencies | Use singleton modules in Module Federation to avoid bundle duplication |
⚠️ But What About The Trade-Offs?
| Challenge | What It Means for You |
|---|---|
| Complex setup | Initial scaffolding can be tricky |
| Performance overhead | Improper setup leads to larger bundles |
| Shared state is harder | Need robust communication patterns |
| Design consistency | Centralized design tokens/components |
| Onboarding new devs | Requires understanding the architecture |
🧰 Common Tools in the Wild
| Purpose | Tools / Frameworks |
|---|---|
| Composition Layer |
single-spa, Module Federation, SystemJS
|
| Shared UI Components |
Bit, Storybook, design tokens |
| Routing |
single-spa, custom orchestrators |
| Deployment | CI/CD pipelines per micro app |
| Monitoring |
Sentry, LogRocket, Datadog
|
🎯 When Should You Use Micro Frontends?
✅ You have multiple teams working on different parts of the UI
✅ You want independent deployments
✅ You’re modernizing a legacy frontend monolith
✅ You want to gradually migrate from one tech stack to another
✅ You’re building a modular platform or dashboard
❌ When Not to Use It?
- Your app is small or managed by a single team
- You don't need frequent independent releases
- You can’t justify the complexity overhead
✨ Final Thoughts
Micro Frontends bring a scalable, team-friendly solution to frontend complexity.
They’re not always the answer — but when used well, they’re a powerful architectural pattern for large apps and fast-moving teams.
Break the monolith. Embrace autonomy. Stay consistent.
Co-authored with: @kenzo_tenma
Top comments (0)