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

OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

open-lambda.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#61

Post by stephenr »

lostcolony wrote: post #29
badminton1 wrote: post #25

I think serverless is a very misleading name, because it does still need server infrastructure and server software. The serverless term will confuse non-technical people to think there's actually no server infrastructure or software needed.

Well, as you posted this after another post that addressed this criticism rather elegantly, I will repeat the relevant bit - " We're OK with 'wireless' access to Internet, although it's pretty clear that the packets will hit a wire at some point. Wireless means I'm not pulling a cord along with my phone. " Non-technical people may assume no server infrastructure. From the developer perspective -this is accurate-; the…

Stop re-posting this bullshit analogy.

There is no technology anywhere that is called "Wireless internet". There is wireless networking, which does exactly what the name implies, it transfers packets from point A to point B, without wires.

That it might be connected to wires at each end is irrelevant because that is a different technology.

"Serverless" is a misleading name - it inherently requires a server, as it's specifically a server-side technology (an event driven function runner).

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#62

Post by cagataygurturk »

I already counted 5 smart people saying in "serverless" there are already "servers". You are very intelligent and reminding me those guys who repeatedly said "there is definitely a string over there dude" while we were watching David Copperfield's show together.

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#65

Post by kowdermeister »

dang wrote: post #31
mrmondo wrote: post #27

So there's no servers, anywhere in this? You don't run it on a computer or anything? Clearly I'm being a smart ass, but pointing out that 'serverless' is an idiotic marketing term.

We've all got these peeves; the one that gets me is 'isomorphic'. But language evolves one annoying incorrectness at a time, and it's tedious and off-topic to vent about this every single time it comes up. (I'm not saying that to you personally but in response to all these subthreads.)

Sure, but it's fundamentally wrong. The only upside is that it's catchy.

It's tiresome to point it out from time to time but if I go to a bar and each time I say Jeronimo and each time I get slapped and explained that they don't like it that there, after a while I'll stop and just ask for a beer like normal people do :)

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#66

Post by kowdermeister »

niftich wrote: post #15
adzicg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind this name. We're OK with 'wireless' access to Internet, although it's pretty clear that the packets will hit a wire at some point. Wireless means I'm not pulling a cord along with my phone. 'serverless' similarly means my code is not listening on a socket, although the request does come from some socket, of course

Your 'wireless' analogy is the most convincing explanation I've heard for the term yet. When I was struggling with accepting 'serverless' as a legitimate name for Function-calls-as-a-Service, I reminded myself that there's no server to SFTP or SSH into to muck about on its filesystem.

Wireless is a wrong analogy.

Wireless refers to the lack of cables _between_ my device and the router. "Serverless" things however are part of the same infrastructure that serve other web services. They are sitting on servers. Computers which has a CPU to execute the functions. We call them servers, therefore serverless is meaningless term.

> there's no server to SFTP or SSH into

There is, but you are not allowed in.

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#67

Post by gmac »

stephenr wrote: post #60
sbarski wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sure people have said this but it's "serverless" from the perspective of the user (who is a developer in this case). The developer doesn't have to deal with servers/infrastructure so for them the system is serverless. I guess it's like wireless... Something could be wireless from the perspective of the end user but there are still wires actually there. I honestly think that serverless is a lot less ambiguous and…

> I am sure people have said this but it's "serverless" from the perspective of the user (who is a developer in this case). It's specifically not server-less. The developer is writing code that will be run on a server. They just don't control that server. That is literally no different than people who push regular Ruby/Python/PHP/NodeJS/Perl/etc apps to platforms platforms like Heroku, or like developers pushing CGI/…

That is literally no different than people who push regular Ruby/Python/PHP/NodeJS/Perl/etc apps to platforms platforms like Heroku

It is different. On Heroku, you have to think (a little) about server configuration, and (especially) about how many servers you need.

In the 'cloud', they're someone else's servers, but they're at least somewhat visible to you. In 'serverless', you don't see them and don't have to worry about them (one hopes).

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#68

Post by dang »

kowdermeister wrote: post #65
dang wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've all got these peeves; the one that gets me is 'isomorphic'. But language evolves one annoying incorrectness at a time, and it's tedious and off-topic to vent about this every single time it comes up. (I'm not saying that to you personally but in response to all these subthreads.)

Sure, but it's fundamentally wrong. The only upside is that it's catchy. It's tiresome to point it out from time to time but if I go to a bar and each time I say Jeronimo and each time I get slapped and explained that they don't like it that there, after a while I'll stop and just ask for a beer like normal people do :)

I doubt that that model applies here.

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#69

Post by badminton1 »

inopinatus wrote: post #39
badminton1 wrote: post #25

I think serverless is a very misleading name, because it does still need server infrastructure and server software. The serverless term will confuse non-technical people to think there's actually no server infrastructure or software needed.

On the contrary, neither of things are required. Most tellingly, Lambda itself was first released as an event-driven service; there was no endpoint to invoke in a client-server fashion. Moreover, although function-as-a-service requires hardware to run on (duh), the need for server-grade compute infrastructure is obviated by the short execution times. You could run a FaaS-based offering on a massive array of smartphon…

Ok, let's step back a little bit.

Do you have a process listening on a port, that accepts connections and handles what is sent through them? If the answer is yes, you have a SERVER. That's the definition of a server.

If connection handler is short lived, well, so it is the case in a HTTP server. It's just a repackaged idea.

Re: OpenLambda, a system for serverless computing

#70

Post by inopinatus »

badminton1 wrote: post #69
inopinatus wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, neither of things are required. Most tellingly, Lambda itself was first released as an event-driven service; there was no endpoint to invoke in a client-server fashion. Moreover, although function-as-a-service requires hardware to run on (duh), the need for server-grade compute infrastructure is obviated by the short execution times. You could run a FaaS-based offering on a massive array of smartphon…

Ok, let's step back a little bit. Do you have a process listening on a port, that accepts connections and handles what is sent through them? If the answer is yes, you have a SERVER. That's the definition of a server. If connection handler is short lived, well, so it is the case in a HTTP server. It's just a repackaged idea.

I agree, and AWS Lambda doesn't work like that. Hence at least one sub-definition justifying the "serverless" tag.
Post reply on HN