GitLab Serverless

Post by runn1ng » Wed, Dec 12, 2018, 9:54 AM UTC

antocv wrote: post #18

PurpleRamen wrote: post #14

Can someone explain me what that hype about serverless is? As I understand it, serverless is just good old webhosting, but in the cloud. With webhosting I mean providers offering a LAMP-environment and customer just upload their code and don't manage anything else. Is this correct? Then how is serverless different to this?

People abuse the term serverless, yes to mean "cloud" or "somebody else server" and "just write the function you want we will find a server to run it on and report to you the result". The term I like to associate with serverless is all peer-to-peer, not client-server architecture, for example any datwebsite, on datproject, and any zsite on zeronet. There you dont have a server, really, a zite is a peer in a torrent s…

Post by icebraining » Wed, Dec 12, 2018, 9:57 AM UTC

seanwilson wrote: post #24

napo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With serverless you only pay for a request and you (almost) don't care about scaling. While non-serverless implies that you have to manage how many server instances you want, and have them running and pay for them even if you have no traffic.

Also, you don't need to worry about server security or server setup outside of the code you're running. With a typical VPS, you'd have to install software updates yourself and have a plan for how to set up a server from scratch again if needed (nontrivial if you do a lot of setup manually over SSH). Essentially, a good way to set something up that requires minimal maintenance.

Post by antocv » Wed, Dec 12, 2018, 10:07 AM UTC

runn1ng wrote: post #35

TomMarius wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not their own definition, this was the default definition just a few years ago.

People started to use the term for something else and now it became the main meaning. "Serverless" is nowadays "AWS Lambda" (and similar products). I wish people called it FaaS (function as a service), but they call it "serverless", and it's fine I guess

Post by bufferoverflow » Wed, Dec 12, 2018, 10:14 AM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #25

TeMPOraL wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does feel like just FTPing a .php file into your LAMP webhost, but with autoscaling, slicker UX and much more vendor lock-in.

With the difference that you pay per request instead of per month / year. Mind you, given how cheap LAMP webhosts can be, I'm fairly sure they would be cheaper if you don't need the autoscaling.

Post by karolist » Wed, Dec 12, 2018, 10:27 AM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #23

TeMPOraL wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does feel like just FTPing a .php file into your LAMP webhost, but with autoscaling, slicker UX and much more vendor lock-in.

> and much more vendor lock-in. This is a myth that really needs to be busted. There is almost no lock in with serverless. The serverless products from all the major providers are nearly identical. The lock in comes from the services you are using within a particular cloud, which you can avoid if you want to by running everything else in k8s.