Serverless can also mean something like EKS with Fargate. You get to use Kubernetes without managing any servers. Azure AKS has something similar with virtual nodes as I understand, though I haven't used them. I do think this model is better for long running services than serverless functions.
Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
71–80 of 150 posts
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#72> The consensus on the internet seems to be "serverless has its use cases" but it's not clear to me what those use cases are. My $0.02, having used serverless before. Those use cases are: * Very very low traffic apps. POST hooks for Slack bots, etc.. Works well! * Someone who is an "architect" can now put "experience with Serverless" on their CV and get hired somewhere else that is looking for that keyword in their C…
Then, the email verification is checked by a second function. You click the link, it updates a field in the DB and redirects to the main page.
login is the same, we validate the creds and give a token.
And then the only infra we maintain is the stuff we have always on and serving mass requests. There's a lot of stuff that doesn't run that often that is more or less a single function and running a fleet or redundant machines for that doesn't really add value.
It just depends on how your app is designed as to if it makes sense.
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#73Any "architect" joining the company and pushing for drastic changes like that is either an idiot chasing the hype, or a malicious actor trying to boost their importance. Good news: your gut feeling is correct. Bad news: you will likely lose this battle, unless you're good at playing company politics. Here's how it typically goes: 1. A new lead/architect/manager joins the company. 2. They push for a new hyped technolo…
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#74You are right that your use case doesn't make sense for going full serverless. An application with heavy and predictable usage doesn't gain anything by becoming serverless. All you're doing is raising your cloud hosting bill.
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#75Having your API's in a bunch of different App Services is sort of a bad idea. You can do it, but you're likely going to have "fun" with how much complexity is involved with setting up the VNETs, Private Endpoints, Custom Domains, DNS stuff and different Subnets that can't be shared across App Service Plans for all those apps and their deployment slots. You're likely also going to be a significantly higher price for it than the alternatives, especially if you use containers, but it's "significantly higher" in a way that's "unimportant" because it's likely peanuts compared to developer salary, total IT expenses and so on.
That being said, an Azure Function App is still an Azure App Service, so unless your Architect means that you should consolidate your different backend App Services into fewer Function Apps, then I don't see the benefit. If you're unsure what I mean by this, it's that you can replace the 60 API routes with 60 functions in an Azure Function App.
> I'm skeptical - I was under the impression that serverless was for small "burstable" apps with relatively low traffic, or background processing.
You're not correct about this. They scale just fine, and they can handle huge workloads, sometimes a lot better than their alternative, though at the cost of locking yourself into your cloud provider.
> The consensus on the internet seems to be "serverless has its use cases" but it's not clear to me what those use cases are.
I can't speak for AWS, but the basic way to view an Azure Function is to use a simple Express NodeJS API as an example. In a standard Azure App Service you're going to write the Express part, you're going to write the routes and you're going to write middleware for them. In a standard Azure Function App you take the Express part out, because that part is handled by the Azure Function.
Azure Functions have the benefits of integrating really well with the rest of Azure, and in many cases can be really good. It's also much easier to work with them because you don't have to care about the "Express" part and can simple work on the business logic. The downside is that you're limited to what Microsoft puts in the Azure Function functionality, and that you lock yourself into Azure.
With C# you further have to consider whether you want to run your Azure Function as an Azure dotnet, or an dotnet-isolated. Again dealing with the degrees of which you'll want to lock yourself into Azure.
> So what should you do?
I think your Cloud Architect should look into Azure Container Apps, or AKS if you want less lock-in. Both are kubernetes, but Azure Container Apps sort of handle the heavy lifting for you, again, though with some of the highest lock-in that you'll find in any Azure product.
It depends a little on your actual circumstances, but generally speaking, your backend service will have an easier life in AKS once you're up and running. I wouldn't personally touch Azure Container Apps, but I'm in a sector of EU where we might be forced to leave Azure. If you're not, it's a much easier road to kubernetes greatness than AKS.
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#76Any "architect" joining the company and pushing for drastic changes like that is either an idiot chasing the hype, or a malicious actor trying to boost their importance. Good news: your gut feeling is correct. Bad news: you will likely lose this battle, unless you're good at playing company politics. Here's how it typically goes: 1. A new lead/architect/manager joins the company. 2. They push for a new hyped technolo…
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#77This is from the perspective of a small startup CTO: We've used AWS Lambda for about 4 years, and it's been so good and so cheap that I'm shifting literally everything (except Redis) to serverless. Also, GCP has a better serverless offering (Cloud Run, Spanner), so we're switching from AWS to GCP to take advantage of that. I bet we're going to see a massive cost reduction, but we'll see. Things I like about serverles…
Been working on a lambda, dynamodb, typescript react app for about 6 months for work and it's been just mind-melting how much money and complexity we've saved switching. I'm talking like 5x the cost drop and we can more easily onboard devs to the project because it's just simpler, no need for a devops hire honestly.
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#78Then if you ever have a bug, you can easily set a breakpoint, step through the entire execution, and fix it.
Agree that this MUST always be possible whatever architecture changes occur.
Then have a flag/config to allow specifying certain things to communicate over network instead of as function calls, and using serverless functions.
I've NEVER seen teams do this though. It's like no one can imagine they will write a bug.
Re: Ask HN: Skeptical about my company going “full serverless”. What am I missing?
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
After using AWS Lambda and Kubernetes for different situations, I would go for Lambda everytime unless I had a compelling reason to use containers because 99% of what people have asked for is a CRUD application. Scales down to 0, so effectively no cost overnight when used infrequently, and if you use a scripting language like Python or JavaScript the startup times are in the ms for a new instance when scaling up. Whe…
> unless I had a compelling reason to use containers AWS Lambda and Google Cloud Functions support containers. > and would be long running. Unless it's running 24/7, you're better of with serverless batch processing systems or you'll need scale-to-zero on your Kubernetes cluster.
While Lambda supports containers, you lose out one one of the largest benefits of having Amazon patch/update the runtime.
Which brings me to my opinion on the value proposition. There’s a concrete cost curve where ECS/EC2 is cheaper than Lambda in what you pay AWS, there’s a much higher inflection point where you are responsible for maintenance/operations. Under that line there’s still a place for serverless.