Live data from Hacker News

Why aren't we all serverless yet?

varoa.net

11–20 of 137 posts

Re: Why aren't we all serverless yet?

#11
I still find the DevEx of serverless terrible compared to the well-established monolith frameworks available to us.

The YAML config, IAM permissions, generating requests and responses, it's all so painful to get anything done.

Admittedly I speak as a software engineer primarily building CRUD apps, where frameworks have had decades of development. I can see use cases for event-driven applications where serverless may make life easier. But for CRUD, currently no chance.

Re: Why aren't we all serverless yet?

#12
I built a serverless startup (GalaticFog) about 8 years ago, had to shut it down. Market never developed. There were some obvious lessons learned.

First most companies thought they needed to do containers before serverless, and frankly it took them a while to get good at that.

Second the programming model was crap. It's really hard to debug across a bunch of function calls that are completely seperate apps. It's just a lot of work, and it made you want to go monolith and containers.

Third, the spin up time was a deal killer in that most people would not let that go, and wanted something always running so there was no latency. Sure workload exist that do not require that, but they are niche, and serverless stayed niche.

Re: Why aren't we all serverless yet?

#13
post #6
post #4

How about cost at scale? Amazon itself shifted Prime Video from serverless to mostly containers and it resulted in huge savings.

Without a link and a breakdown that makes no sense. We switched from blue to square and saw a honey suckle savings. Amazon runs both and serverless is a billing model. Many serverless runtimes consume containers. Serverless, like microservices are a design philosophy.

https://archive.is/ehJbY

> Scaling up the Prime Video audio/video monitoring service and reducing costs by 90%

> The move from a distributed microservices architecture to a monolith application helped achieve higher scale, resilience, and reduce costs.

Re: Why aren't we all serverless yet?

#15
I always found the whole thing odd personally. The Venn Diagram of people who both need to run a service in the cloud AND cannot manage an EC2 instance is a seemingly small set of people. I never saw the advantage to it and its got plenty of drawbacks.

Re: Why aren't we all serverless yet?

#17
I think it’s all about cost analysis. That said, there are definitely some services that are worth outsourcing, like smtp, until you get to a certain size.

Separately, when you factor in data privacy, your decision making tree will certainly change quickly.

Re: Why aren't we all serverless yet?

#18
For me, it's because Rails has continued to be an excellent solution in every application I've ever needed to build, whether it's a project with 1 user or 10 million, or with a dev team of 1 or 100.

Every time I try to solve a problem with anything other than Rails, I run into endless issues and headaches that would have been already solved if I just. used. Rails.

Post reply on HN