Monolithic Store vs. Slice Pattern for Scaling State Updates

When scaling a React application with Zustand, there is a design choice between maintaining a single monolithic store or partitioning state into specialized slices merged into a root store.

A monolithic store simplifies state access and global updates but can lead to complex mutation logic as the state tree grows. Conversely, the slice pattern allows for modular state definitions, where separate functions define distinct portions of the state and are merged using the spread operator during store creation.

The primary constraint is ensuring that components only re-render when their specific dependencies change, regardless of the store's internal organization.

• Does the slice pattern introduce significant overhead in state merging compared to a monolithic structure?
• Which approach provides better maintainability for complex partial updates using the set function?