Microfrontend architecture

#frontend #architecture #systemdesign #webdev

🧱 What is Microfrontend Architecture?

Simply put — just like microservices, microfrontends are an architectural style where independently deliverable frontend applications are composed into a greater whole.

This post is a quick read on benefits, trade-offs, implementation concerns, best practices, and helps you decide whether microfrontends are right for your application and team.

⚖️ Traditional npm Packages vs. Microfrontends

Let’s understand the contrast with a simple example:

Imagine an e-commerce website that has:

A Home Page (with header and footer components)
A Products Page, which also needs these shared components along with its own business logic.

🧩 Option 1: Independent Packages on npm

In this setup, whenever the Home Page team updates the header, they must:

Publish a new version of the corresponding npm package.
Update the Home Page UI to the latest version.
Communicate the same to the Products team, who must also update their dependencies.

This process is slow and introduces coupling at the release stage—undermining the core principle of independent deployments.

🌐 Option 2: Microfrontend Implementation (Module Federation or Others)

With microfrontends, updates made to shared components (like the header and footer) by the Home Page team are automatically consumed by the Products team.

Additional advantages:

Teams can use the same frameworks/libraries (e.g., React) without duplicating builds.
The approach is tech-agnostic — teams can work with different UI frameworks if needed.
Changes are reflected in real time, improving agility and reducing coordination overhead.

🚀 Benefits of Microfrontends

Incremental Upgrades
Isolated upgrades can be done without worrying about breaking the entire app — unlike monolithic frontends.
Simple, Decoupled Codebases
Clear separation of concerns enforces better data flow and stricter boundaries — something that should exist even in monoliths.See: #FallToThePitOfSuccess
Independent Deployments
Each microfrontend can be deployed on its own schedule without blocking others.
Autonomous Teams
Each team can own, deploy, and innovate independently, leading to faster delivery and reduced coordination cost.

⚠️ Downsides & Trade-offs

Payload Size:
Each microfrontend may re-download shared dependencies, increasing bundle size.
This can be mitigated with Module Federation configurations, marking dependencies as externals, or network-level sharing — though this reintroduces a version coupling contract.
Environment Differences:
Microfrontends are often rendered both inside the container application and independently (for local development).

However, mismatches between local and production environments can cause unexpected integration issues.

Deploy small, frequent changes to production-like environments early to catch and fix issues sooner.
Operational & Governance Complexity:
Before adopting microfrontends, teams should answer a few key questions:
- Do we have the infrastructure and resources to manage independent microfrontends?
- Are we comfortable with the decentralization and reduced control this architecture introduces?
- Will our applications scale to justify multiple microfrontends?
- How will we maintain quality, design consistency, and shared standards across all apps?

🧠 Final Thoughts

Microfrontends can be a game changer for large-scale, multi-team frontend architectures — offering flexibility, autonomy, and scalability.

But they also bring operational complexity, dependency management challenges, and governance overhead.

The key is balance: adopt microfrontends only when your team’s size, structure, and velocity demand it, not because it’s trendy and you want teams to be working independently and avoiding the collaboration efforts!.