> With serverless computing, your application still runs on servers,
Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
81–90 of 152 posts
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#82Amazon Lambda is like Microsoft Windows was in its early stages. It's a fast-growing, closed/proprietary system for running apps. I wouldn't be surprised if it achieves a near-monopoly for a while... But I think that eventually more flexible open source solutions will take over. Open platforms like Docker and Kubernetes will likely replace Lambda just as Linux replaced Windows on the server-side.
I don't think Linux ever replaced Windows on the server-side. Rather, Windows never made serious inroads into the server-side.
Or perhaps I missed the point of your last sentence.
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#83Is anyone else slightly peeved by the popularity of this misnomer? If you are paying for servers , your app isn't serverless . Real serverless to me means decentralized p2p and offline apps. I also consider p2p-routed apps with centralized control serverless as long as they continue to function in a read-only state when the control server is down.
No, I'm not peeved by the "misnomer". What is getting a bit annoying is every conversation about serverless being dominated by snarky comments about there being no such thing. As software professionals, we all know there is a server involved in responding to requests for our applications. But 'serverless' does accurately describe services like AWS Lambda, because the experience of development is such that you don't really have to think about servers, along with all the complexity of provisioning, configuring and managing them.
TL;DR: It's just a name. Get over it.
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
These were already the promises of "the Cloud" until everyone started calling their Raspberry Pis at home a "cloud". Now the same thing has got another stupid name: Serverless. I wonder what the same stuff will be called two years from now.
Yes, services (such as AWS S3) that could be considered serverless have existed for some time now. What has changed is that the suite of services now exist to fully enable an application to be (almost) completely serverless. Similar to micro-services, people will overuse the word and it will seem like a fad. IMO, it's more than a fad. Once the toolchain is mature, it will become the default way of building applicatio…
S3 is not serverless. Just because the implementation details (i.e. how servers are provisioned) are obscured from the end user doesn't make serverless.
Web 3.0 is truly serverless because your application lives on a decentralized p2p cloud.
Ethereum/Swarm(or IPFS)/Whisper is an example of a serverless p2p stack.
You may as well call the service they're selling "managed", because that's what it is.
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, services (such as AWS S3) that could be considered serverless have existed for some time now. What has changed is that the suite of services now exist to fully enable an application to be (almost) completely serverless. Similar to micro-services, people will overuse the word and it will seem like a fad. IMO, it's more than a fad. Once the toolchain is mature, it will become the default way of building applicatio…
S3 is not serverless. Just because the implementation details (i.e. how servers are provisioned) are obscured from the end user doesn't make serverless. Web 3.0 is truly serverless because your application lives on a decentralized p2p cloud. Ethereum/Swarm(or IPFS)/Whisper is an example of a serverless p2p stack. You may as well call the service they're selling "managed", because that's what it is.
That's not how the term serverless is being used most places. See first comment I made. It's not being without server. It's about not thinking about the server.
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#86Is anyone else slightly peeved by the popularity of this misnomer? If you are paying for servers , your app isn't serverless . Real serverless to me means decentralized p2p and offline apps. I also consider p2p-routed apps with centralized control serverless as long as they continue to function in a read-only state when the control server is down.
I am. But this is just another 'shiny new thing'. It's not that it doesn't have it's place or function, but it's not as 'special' as it's presented as either. Back when you delivered your stack of punchcards, you were practically serverless too. You didn't know how it was going to be loaded, who would do it, where the machine would be, of how to get in to do things yourself. It's just code in, results out.
This practically fits in the same boat as docker...
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#87Amazon has invalid 404 links to the tutorial sections on the main page.
"This workshop is broken up into five modules."
And most of those module links are broken too ;-)
Can only be viewed in a step-by-step mode.
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#88Is anyone else slightly peeved by the popularity of this misnomer? If you are paying for servers , your app isn't serverless . Real serverless to me means decentralized p2p and offline apps. I also consider p2p-routed apps with centralized control serverless as long as they continue to function in a read-only state when the control server is down.
It's called serverless because, for all intents and purposes, you don't know or control: * how many real or virtual servers are running your code. * how the servers were provisioned or setup. * how to access the servers (either via SSH or programmatically), either than through predefined APIs. * what happens when the servers break. * what causes the servers to disappear. * etc. The "server" concept has been abstracte…
We still run and manage our servers and save a metric ton of money wrt. "cloud" offerings.
When "cloud" or "serverless" will be cheaper than managing your own dedicated servers, then it will actually be useful. Until then, it's just marketing.
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#89Is anyone else slightly peeved by the popularity of this misnomer? If you are paying for servers , your app isn't serverless . Real serverless to me means decentralized p2p and offline apps. I also consider p2p-routed apps with centralized control serverless as long as they continue to function in a read-only state when the control server is down.
No, I'm not peeved by the "misnomer". What is getting a bit annoying is every conversation about serverless being dominated by snarky comments about there being no such thing. As software professionals, we all know there is a server involved in responding to requests for our applications. But 'serverless' does accurately describe services like AWS Lambda, because the experience of development is such that you don't r…
Agreed, it is very annoying, maybe 'serverless' isn't the best name, but 'adminless' is no better. All the banal comments about the name have really impeded discussion about this topic.
I personally am angered at the 'everyone should be a sys admin' culture we've come into as a profession, it completely trivializes the role of sys admins who are critical to any product/company. Good sys admins bring a lot to the table, just like experienced DBAs.
Edit; wow either everyone really hates sys admins and dba's or prefer "adminless", any down voters care to explain?
In truth, I don't think the name 'serverless' will stick in the long term, there is just too much animosity for it. The useage here by AWS is the first time I've seen it in a couple of months. Anecdata, but I think most would admit it's not very common.
Re: Build a Serverless Web Applicaion
#90Has anyone used RDS from lambda? Don't want to use Dynamo but perhaps for some key Val store.
Hopefully we will see AWS release a managed serverless SQL db solution at re:Invent 2017. Like DynamoDB but for SQL.
> Like DynamoDB but for SQL
This would basically be the game-changer for building backends on lambda.
The absolute key and most valuable piece in most backends is the persistent datastore. I absolutely want to build functional stateless business logic on lambda, but I absolutely will not, no matter the gain from not having to manage servers, have my database be dynamodb or any other non-RDBMS, for any serious application in 2017.