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

CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#11

Post by EtDybNuvCu »

keithwhor wrote: post #4

I noticed this non-exhaustive list has left out StdLib [1], an all-in-one API development, provisioning, and FaaS platform with tens of thousands of developers. (Disclaimer: am founder :)) We don’t work directly with the CNCF because we’re a four person team; we don’t have the bandwidth to engage in committees. We innovate as best we can with our platform and deliver value directly to customers. The reason you, as a…

Your product is not interesting to me if it doesn't integrate with Prometheus, a CNCF-backed project. It sounds like you could stand to swallow your pride and interact with the community more.

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#12

Post by rubiquity »

jacques_chester wrote: post #10
friendly_chap wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you 100%. It's the same old thing with barely any changes. There is truly nothing new under the sun and we keep reinventing the same things. I like to think this industry is full of smart people, but it always makes me surprised how willing are we to drink the kool aid. Guess being smart and having a herd mentality are not mutually exclusive. (Perhaps they are actually correlated? :P - Ie. my professor a…

There isn't anything new, but it's also worth remembering Mark Twain's quip: history doesn't repeat itself, but sometimes, it rhymes. FaaSes do add some twists on CGI. In CGI the short-livedness is the process , in a FaaS it's the container . A CGI program can get away with relying on local modifications to a file system in a shared environment. FaaSes somewhat point away from that. There's also the speed of scaling.…

I don’t disagree that FaaS and CGI are wildly different but I’m not sure I understand your distinction between containers and processes. Containers are processes decorated with networking namespaces, control groups, and chroot.

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#13

Post by jacques_chester »

rubiquity wrote: post #12
jacques_chester wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't anything new, but it's also worth remembering Mark Twain's quip: history doesn't repeat itself, but sometimes, it rhymes. FaaSes do add some twists on CGI. In CGI the short-livedness is the process , in a FaaS it's the container . A CGI program can get away with relying on local modifications to a file system in a shared environment. FaaSes somewhat point away from that. There's also the speed of scaling.…

I don’t disagree that FaaS and CGI are wildly different but I’m not sure I understand your distinction between containers and processes. Containers are processes decorated with networking namespaces, control groups, and chroot.

The thing I'm driving at is that containers create much stronger isolation than shared hosting does.

Both are processes, but the administrative overhead is lower when you can contain the blast radius with namespaces and cgroups. The illusion of isolation is much more complete to the containerised process than for an uncontainerised one.

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#14

Post by caniszczyk »

keithwhor wrote: post #4

I noticed this non-exhaustive list has left out StdLib [1], an all-in-one API development, provisioning, and FaaS platform with tens of thousands of developers. (Disclaimer: am founder :)) We don’t work directly with the CNCF because we’re a four person team; we don’t have the bandwidth to engage in committees. We innovate as best we can with our platform and deliver value directly to customers. The reason you, as a…

file an issue and we can add it to the serverless landscape: https://github.com/cncf/landscape/issues

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#15

Post by keithwhor »

EtDybNuvCu wrote: post #11
keithwhor wrote: post #4

I noticed this non-exhaustive list has left out StdLib [1], an all-in-one API development, provisioning, and FaaS platform with tens of thousands of developers. (Disclaimer: am founder :)) We don’t work directly with the CNCF because we’re a four person team; we don’t have the bandwidth to engage in committees. We innovate as best we can with our platform and deliver value directly to customers. The reason you, as a…

Your product is not interesting to me if it doesn't integrate with Prometheus, a CNCF-backed project. It sounds like you could stand to swallow your pride and interact with the community more.

I’m certainly proud of what we’re building and the great team we’ve pulled together. We happily support our own community of tens of thousands and growing, in the past two months alone we’ve sponsored five student Hackathons and introduced thousands of young, excited minds and the future of software development to “serverless” workflows.

These developers have built everything from passive notifiers to help the elderly [0] to smart city garbage collection bins that integrate with City’s Slack teams to notify when bins need to be changed [1].

Our team is active 24 hours per day at these events and more, shipping releases to both paying customers and free tier developers into the wee hours of the morning. We’re very lucky to have a small but motivated team of the most competent engineers I’ve ever had the pleasure of working with and we’re humbled to be working with companies tens to hundreds of times our size that do hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue combined.

So, pride? Certainly. :) I just don’t think it’s the deadly-sin type you may be insinuating. It would be disingenuous to my team, our customers, and our Enterprise partners if I wasn’t proud of the work we’re doing (that’s not to say there’s not plenty of room for improvement! We’re constantly growing and responding to customer and developer needs.). However, we don’t have a single customer that has asked for (or even suggested) any sort of foundation membership at this point. We simply don’t have the resources to be part of a committee: we are already stretched thin with many boots on the ground doing work that, yes, we’re proud of. I’m not precluding it from the future, it’s just not on our roadmap right now.

Happy to understand how you think Prometheus may help us, though!

[0] https://twitter.com/shivkanthb/status/965409645136199680

[1] https://twitter.com/stdlibhq/status/960179903621750794

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#16

Post by friendly_chap »

jacques_chester wrote: post #10
friendly_chap wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you 100%. It's the same old thing with barely any changes. There is truly nothing new under the sun and we keep reinventing the same things. I like to think this industry is full of smart people, but it always makes me surprised how willing are we to drink the kool aid. Guess being smart and having a herd mentality are not mutually exclusive. (Perhaps they are actually correlated? :P - Ie. my professor a…

There isn't anything new, but it's also worth remembering Mark Twain's quip: history doesn't repeat itself, but sometimes, it rhymes. FaaSes do add some twists on CGI. In CGI the short-livedness is the process , in a FaaS it's the container . A CGI program can get away with relying on local modifications to a file system in a shared environment. FaaSes somewhat point away from that. There's also the speed of scaling.…

That's a good way of looking at it, thank you.

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#17

Post by keithwhor »

caniszczyk wrote: post #14
keithwhor wrote: post #4

I noticed this non-exhaustive list has left out StdLib [1], an all-in-one API development, provisioning, and FaaS platform with tens of thousands of developers. (Disclaimer: am founder :)) We don’t work directly with the CNCF because we’re a four person team; we don’t have the bandwidth to engage in committees. We innovate as best we can with our platform and deliver value directly to customers. The reason you, as a…

file an issue and we can add it to the serverless landscape: https://github.com/cncf/landscape/issues

Hey Chris,

Thank you so much for this. I received your e-mail as well and it means a lot you’d go through the effort to reach out directly. The team is really appreciative. Will follow up shortly - in the midst of travel. :)

Re: CNCF Serverless Whitepaper v1.0

#18

Post by dankohn1 »

keithwhor wrote: post #15
EtDybNuvCu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your product is not interesting to me if it doesn't integrate with Prometheus, a CNCF-backed project. It sounds like you could stand to swallow your pride and interact with the community more.

I’m certainly proud of what we’re building and the great team we’ve pulled together. We happily support our own community of tens of thousands and growing, in the past two months alone we’ve sponsored five student Hackathons and introduced thousands of young, excited minds and the future of software development to “serverless” workflows. These developers have built everything from passive notifiers to help the elderl…

Just to be clear, membership in CNCF is not required to participate in any of our workgroups (including serverless [0]) or projects, such as Prometheus [1].

Disclosure: I'm executive director of CNCF.

[0] https://github.com/cncf/wg-serverless

[1] https://www.cncf.io/projects/

Post reply on HN