Serverless Architectures
martinfowler.com
Serverless Architectures
1–10 of 149 posts
Re: Serverless Architectures
#2Why not MTTaaS - Misleading Technology Terms as a Service.
Re: Serverless Architectures
#3The API gateway made me smile. In the 90's we had message queues. In the 00's we had service busses. Today we have API gateways. All they do is route requests - they're all the same thing.
There's merit in serverless, no doubt. There are many things that worry me. Not owning the infrastructure means I don't get the telemetry I'd like, making triage difficult. Direct access to the database is a good idea said nobody ever. And at what point does my own infrastructure become more cost-effective than cloud?
Those concerns don't invalidate the applicability or relevance of serverless though. I think its value as a protyping tool, or to validate a proof of concept is huge.
Re: Serverless Architectures
#4The API gateway made me smile. In the 90's we had message queues. In the 00's we had service busses. Today we have API gateways. All they do is route requests - they're all the same thing. There's merit in serverless, no doubt. There are many things that worry me. Not owning the infrastructure means I don't get the telemetry I'd like, making triage difficult. Direct access to the database is a good idea said nobody e…
> And at what point does my own infrastructure become more cost-effective than cloud?
I am no expert at all, but one idea came to mind: say you have this small festival each year (or once) where you have 1 month (or less) you can buy tickets. Instead of setting up, securing, etc a whole server stack you can simply run te ticket-purchase code on a FaaS and have a database with results. Running your single page app all year on a very simple host, but having this database and compute thing only one month.
Re: Serverless Architectures
#5How did this came to be known as serverless?
It just seems to be an extreme case of microservices running on someone else's computer?
Re: Serverless Architectures
#6It is misleading that the HN title suggests the author is Martin Fowler, but this is not the case for this guest article. The actual author is Mike Roberts, the article is hosted on Fowler's site.
Re: Serverless Architectures
#7The API gateway made me smile. In the 90's we had message queues. In the 00's we had service busses. Today we have API gateways. All they do is route requests - they're all the same thing. There's merit in serverless, no doubt. There are many things that worry me. Not owning the infrastructure means I don't get the telemetry I'd like, making triage difficult. Direct access to the database is a good idea said nobody e…
> And at what point does my own infrastructure become more cost-effective than cloud? I am no expert at all, but one idea came to mind: say you have this small festival each year (or once) where you have 1 month (or less) you can buy tickets. Instead of setting up, securing, etc a whole server stack you can simply run te ticket-purchase code on a FaaS and have a database with results. Running your single page app all…
Or, better, utilise PaaS service for ticketing, which hopefully has better UX, design, security etc.
Re: Serverless Architectures
#8How did this came to be known as serverless? It just seems to be an extreme case of microservices running on someone else's computer?
The other buzzwords have run out.
Re: Serverless Architectures
#9The API gateway made me smile. In the 90's we had message queues. In the 00's we had service busses. Today we have API gateways. All they do is route requests - they're all the same thing. There's merit in serverless, no doubt. There are many things that worry me. Not owning the infrastructure means I don't get the telemetry I'd like, making triage difficult. Direct access to the database is a good idea said nobody e…
The vast majority of web sites on the internet today don't need much infrastructure, they're low traffic blogs, web sites for the hair salon down the street, or a landing page for a non software corporation. Facebook fills this role for a lot users, and they in turn sacrifice their data and privacy to a souless corporation. Don't forget the $billions dollars industry of shared hosting providers out there. A lot of businesses still pay $10 a month for a shared server, mysql, and php.
Why should this be the case? Why should it cost anything to have an online presence today? Why shouldn't users own their data? In my personal opinion, these types of FAAS (function as a service) and mBAAS (mobile Backend as a service) the article is talking are an enabling technology in this regard.
Re: Serverless Architectures
#10The API gateway made me smile. In the 90's we had message queues. In the 00's we had service busses. Today we have API gateways. All they do is route requests - they're all the same thing. There's merit in serverless, no doubt. There are many things that worry me. Not owning the infrastructure means I don't get the telemetry I'd like, making triage difficult. Direct access to the database is a good idea said nobody e…
The vast majority of web sites on the internet today don't need much infrastructure, they're low traffic blogs, web sites for the hair salon down the street, or a landing page for a non software corporation. Facebook fills this role for a lot users, and they in turn sacrifice their data and privacy to a souless corporation. Don't forget the $billions dollars industry of shared hosting providers out there. A lot of bu…
Even if it costs nothing, Facebook is a far better option for hair salons and other similar small businesses. Facebook drives engagement and views, while nobody will bother with a self hosted website. The oft repeated lesson here is that convenience trumps privacy for the vast majority of users. If you look at the last decade, in spite of there being robust, self-hosted solutions for syndication and engagement such as RSS, pingbacks, OPML etc, in the end closed systems won.
Maybe there is a secret ingredient to making it work again, but we don't know what that is. Yet.