Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Serverless Map/Reduce

tothestars.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 161 posts

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#31

Post by stcredzero »

jedberg wrote: post #28
stcredzero wrote: post #18

I wonder if something like AWS Lambda could be applied to multiplayer games? It seems like game-loop based games would be a good domain for such a programming model. The entire game could be expressed as a function that turns tick N into tick N+1. Such a function would be composed of many other functions, of course. So for example, there would also be a function that took as an argument the player at time N and gave…

This was exactly the demo they gave and their AWS Dev Day in SF in July. Using Lambda and the IOT gateway to run a massively multiplayer game (they had everyone in the room play from the web via their phone).

But was that just a demo, or are they going to make a product out of that?

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#33

Post by jahewson »

lucd wrote: post #11

How does it compare to 3 years old Joyent's Manta ? AFAIK it was especially designed for this kind of purposes. The processing is made directly on the servers storing the data..

Manta is pretty similar to Elastic MapReduce, which also runs the computation on the same node as the data. So it compares pretty much the same as EMR.

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#35

Post by stochastician »

Author of the figures used in the blog post here. We wrote https://github.com/ericmjonas/pywren somewhat on a lark, because it seemed to fit well with our research goals and it's fun to push systems to their limit. I'm now a total serverless convert! I'd love more collaborators and feedback, the goal is to make these sorts of computations as easy as possible for python developers, especially on the scientific computing side of things.

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#36

Post by chrisseaton »

jedberg wrote: post #26
teej wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some are, some aren't. For example, my experience has been that it's harder to get the 100 S3 bucket-per-account limit raised.

That used to be a hard technological limitation but they fixed it a few months back. You should be able to get more now (but you have to have a good justification for it).

100 seems an odd number to be a technological limitation, doesn't it? It's not a power of two or anything so it's not the size of an integer. How could technology have been limiting it?

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#37

Post by benballjr »

iagooar wrote: post #14
amelius wrote: post #2

If it doesn't run on a server, then what does this plumbing-work run on? Clickbait name?

Call it Function as a Service if you prefer.

Even that's tricky, because it's also Backend as a Service BaaS/MBaaS at work, various frameworks and other solutions, etc.

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#38

Post by benballjr »

luhn wrote: post #7
amelius wrote: post #2

If it doesn't run on a server, then what does this plumbing-work run on? Clickbait name?

Oh come on. Is it still not accepted that "serverless" is the colloquial name for AWS Lambda and comparable services? Stop trying to make "FaaS" happen. It's not going to happen.

Serverless is definitely the accepted term. FaaS and BaaS (backend as a service) are both serverless implementations--is my understanding.

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#39

Post by gohrt »

luhn wrote: post #7
amelius wrote: post #2

If it doesn't run on a server, then what does this plumbing-work run on? Clickbait name?

Oh come on. Is it still not accepted that "serverless" is the colloquial name for AWS Lambda and comparable services? Stop trying to make "FaaS" happen. It's not going to happen.

Sigh, Why isn't just "Cloud"? They thought "cloud" sounded old and lame, so they made up an even dumber name to sound futuristic?

Re: Serverless Map/Reduce

#40

Post by ceejayoz »

teej wrote: post #25
ceejayoz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, most of the limits are there just to prevent "whoops, we fired up 500 $2/hour servers and left them running all month, can you refund us?" sort of newbie situations. Very few are technological and AWS has been happy to bump them up for me in each occasion I've had a need.

Some are, some aren't. For example, my experience has been that it's harder to get the 100 S3 bucket-per-account limit raised.

IIRC that was one of the few the AWS docs specifically called out as unraisable.
Post reply on HN