Fundamentals9 min

Vertical vs Horizontal Scaling: when to use each

Scale up or scale out? Understand the differences, trade-offs, and when each strategy makes sense for your system.

When a system needs to support more load, the first question that arises is: how do we scale? The answer usually involves two fundamental strategies: vertical scaling and horizontal scaling.

Each approach has distinct characteristics, advantages, and limitations. Choosing wrong can mean unnecessary costs, additional complexity, or worse, a system that still can't handle the demand.

This article explores the differences between vertical and horizontal scaling, the trade-offs involved, and when each strategy makes sense.

Scaling isn't just adding resources. It's choosing the right strategy for the right problem.

Vertical Scaling (Scale Up)

Vertical scaling means increasing the capacity of a single machine — more CPU, more memory, more storage, faster processors.

It's the most intuitive approach: if the server is slow, get a more powerful server.

How it works

Before: 1 server with 4 CPUs and 16GB RAM
After: 1 server with 16 CPUs and 64GB RAM

The system continues running on a single instance, but with more available resources.

Advantages of vertical scaling

1. Operational simplicity

No need to change the architecture. The code stays the same, communication between components remains local, there's no complexity of distributed systems.

2. No code changes

Applications that weren't designed to run on multiple instances can immediately benefit from more resources.

3. Guaranteed consistency

With a single instance, there are no issues with state synchronization, distributed cache, or eventual consistency.

4. Predictable latency

Local communication is orders of magnitude faster than network communication.

Limitations of vertical scaling

1. Physical limit

There's a ceiling to how much you can scale a single machine. Even the largest cloud instances have limits.

2. Non-linear cost

Doubling resources doesn't cost double — it usually costs much more. Very large machines have premium pricing.

3. Single point of failure

If the server goes down, the entire system goes down. There's no inherent redundancy.

4. Downtime for upgrades

Moving to a larger machine usually requires restarting the service.

Horizontal Scaling (Scale Out)

Horizontal scaling means adding more instances of the system, distributing the load across multiple machines.

Instead of one powerful server, you have several servers working together.

How it works

Before: 1 server with 4 CPUs and 16GB RAM
After: 4 servers with 4 CPUs and 16GB RAM each

The load is distributed among instances through a load balancer.

Advantages of horizontal scaling

1. Theoretically unlimited scale

You can add as many instances as needed. Large systems like Google, Netflix, and Amazon operate with thousands of instances.

2. High availability

If one instance fails, the others continue operating. The system is resilient by design.

3. Cost-effective at large scale

Many small machines usually cost less than one equivalent giant machine.

4. Elastic scaling

You can add or remove instances based on demand, paying only for what you use.

5. Upgrades without downtime

Updates can be done instance by instance (rolling deployment).

Limitations of horizontal scaling

1. Architectural complexity

The system needs to be designed to run on multiple instances. This affects:

  • State management (sessions, cache)
  • Data consistency
  • Service-to-service communication

2. Network overhead

Communication between instances adds latency and points of failure.

3. Distributed coordination

Problems like leader election, distributed locks, and event ordering are complex.

4. Operational costs

More instances mean more monitoring, more logs, more deployment complexity.

Direct comparison

Aspect Vertical Horizontal
Complexity Low High
Scale limit Physical (finite) Theoretical (infinite)
High availability Not inherent Yes inherent
Code changes None Usually required
Cost at large scale High Moderate
Internal latency Very low Higher (network)
Elasticity Limited Full

When to use each strategy

Use vertical scaling when:

  • The system wasn't designed for distribution
  • Expected load has a known and achievable limit
  • Operational simplicity is a priority
  • The cost of upgrade downtime is acceptable
  • You're early in the project and validating the product

Use horizontal scaling when:

  • Load can grow indefinitely
  • High availability is a critical requirement
  • You need elasticity (demand peaks and valleys)
  • The system was already designed to be stateless
  • Cost at large scale is a concern

The reality: hybrid approach

In practice, most systems use both strategies at different layers:

  • Database: usually scales vertically first (larger machines), then horizontally (read replicas, sharding)
  • Application: usually scales horizontally (multiple instances behind a load balancer)
  • Cache: can scale in both directions depending on the solution

Example of hybrid architecture

                    ┌─────────────────┐
                    │  Load Balancer  │
                    └────────┬────────┘
                             │
        ┌────────────────────┼────────────────────┐
        │                    │                    │
   ┌────▼────┐          ┌────▼────┐          ┌────▼────┐
   │ App 1   │          │ App 2   │          │ App 3   │  ← Horizontal
   └────┬────┘          └────┬────┘          └────┬────┘
        │                    │                    │
        └────────────────────┼────────────────────┘
                             │
                    ┌────────▼────────┐
                    │   Database      │  ← Vertical (primary)
                    │   (Primary)     │
                    └────────┬────────┘
                             │
              ┌──────────────┼──────────────┐
              │              │              │
         ┌────▼────┐    ┌────▼────┐    ┌────▼────┐
         │ Replica │    │ Replica │    │ Replica │  ← Horizontal (read)
         └─────────┘    └─────────┘    └─────────┘

Common mistakes

1. Scaling horizontally without preparing the application

Adding instances of a stateful application causes inconsistencies, lost sessions, and unpredictable behavior.

2. Scaling vertically indefinitely

"Let's just get a bigger machine" works up to a point. After that, you're stuck.

3. Ignoring the real bottleneck

Sometimes the problem isn't processing capacity, but disk I/O, network, or an external service. Scaling won't fix it.

4. Scaling without measuring

Adding resources without knowing if they'll be used is waste. Always measure before and after.

Conclusion

Vertical and horizontal scaling are complementary tools, not mutually exclusive.

  • Vertical offers simplicity and is ideal for smaller systems or specific components
  • Horizontal offers resilience and unlimited scale, but requires proper architecture

The right choice depends on context: availability requirements, load patterns, architecture maturity, and cost constraints.

Before deciding how to scale, answer: what is the current bottleneck? Without this answer, any scaling decision is a guess.

Scaling is easy. Scaling right is engineering.

scalabilityarchitectureinfrastructurecloud

Want to understand your platform's limits?

Contact us for a performance assessment.

Contact Us