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

A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 266 posts

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#71

Post by jessaustin »

k__ wrote: post #29
abjKT26nO8 wrote: post #5

I don't know anything about serverless --- to this day I fail to understand what this word is even supposed to mean. And the deployment diagram[1] sure looks complicated to me. I think I prefer old-school servers. [1]: " rel="nofollow">https://raw.githubusercontent.com/0x4447/0x4447-product-s3-e...

"the deployment diagram[1] sure looks complicated to me" It's just very detailed. It also includes all the CI/CD services/roles they used. 28 boxes alone are permissions related. The stuff that runs in the end (like a server would) are 3 Lambda functions and an S3 bucket.

Maybe that tells us something about how complicated handling permissions on AWS might be?

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#72

Post by scarface74 »

ighk77 wrote: post #57
scarface74 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it’s not just managed hosting. Managed hosting still means there is a server to maintain, patch, and that it is always running.

To you. But the world has moved on from Apple 2e and now managed hosting is analogous to serverless. See because only science has a concrete fixed point for measuring which is the speed of light. Human culture is subjective buzzwords where the only relative fixed point is when they learned a term. Serverless is “managed hosting 3.0”. First there was bare metal, run your cage. Then ec2/traditional VMs. Now just an eph…

I can’t tell what your point is. I’m agreeing that managed hosting is the next evolution.

But Lambda is more than just for APIs. But if you’re worried about the “lock in” boogeyman for APIs, there are small packages for every language that lambda supports that allows you to run your standard Node/Express, C#/WebAPI, Python/Django/Flask API, etc on lambda just by changing the entry point.

Right now I’m deploying a Node/Express app to both lambda and Fargate (Serverless Docker) withoit any code changes.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#73

Post by scarface74 »

tyingq wrote: post #49
scarface74 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it’s not just managed hosting. Managed hosting still means there is a server to maintain, patch, and that it is always running.

There's a firecracker VM and a Linux OS under the Lambda. Both of which need to be maintained by Amazon. Edit: "managed cgi-bin" is perhaps more apt.

cgi-bin didn’t have any type of process isolation.

Also, it didn’t tie in to other none web based events.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#74

Post by vidarh »

cs02rm0 wrote: post #60
AznHisoka wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how is it different than running it in the cloud?

It is in the cloud. It's different in that you don't have access to the cloud server, just a service on it. To me it's like having one hand tied behind your back while someone else uses their hand to do what you'd have done with the one tied behind your back. It's cheaper, sometimes it works the way you want it to, but you always feel a bit restricted.

The less pessimistic interpretation is that it's like having someone else be your devops department. Unlike what people like to think, most people running traditional VMs and containers end up doing just as much devops as on a dedicated server (while doing consulting, I'd typically get more hours at higher rates out of people insisting on AWS, because getting an AWS setup right is a lot of work), so serveless is appealing as a way of making more of the devops stuff someone elses problem.

I get your feeling - I like to be able to ssh in as well, but then I see people I've worked for, and realise that to most of them having ssh access does no good, because they don't know how to troubleshoot over an ssh connection, and they don't want to have to know.

To them, losing that flexibility doesn't really matter, because they weren't doing it anyway.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#75

Post by vsareto »

scarface74 wrote: post #30
abjKT26nO8 wrote: post #5

I don't know anything about serverless --- to this day I fail to understand what this word is even supposed to mean. And the deployment diagram[1] sure looks complicated to me. I think I prefer old-school servers. [1]: " rel="nofollow">https://raw.githubusercontent.com/0x4447/0x4447-product-s3-e...

I still fail to understand why 4 years in, people seem to be confused about the idea that definitions of words involve over the years and that the computer industry has both been coining and adopting phrases. But a quick Google search is all that it would take to “understand it” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serverless_computing

I can't wait until society swaps the meaning of left and right through memes

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#76

Post by k__ »

jessaustin wrote: post #71
k__ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the deployment diagram[1] sure looks complicated to me" It's just very detailed. It also includes all the CI/CD services/roles they used. 28 boxes alone are permissions related. The stuff that runs in the end (like a server would) are 3 Lambda functions and an S3 bucket.

Maybe that tells us something about how complicated handling permissions on AWS might be?

I don't know.

You have a service and give it a role that has some permissions. If you want to have the minimal permissions probably would at least end up with services*2 roles&policies if you write a custom policiy for every role, so the service can't do more than needed.

I mean, you could probably calculate one role and one policy for all the stuff that runs, to make it really simple, but I don't think this will make it secure.

But, yes, I don't like IAM either.

I read some people don't even use it anymore, but I didn't find out what they are doing instead.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#77

Post by docuru »

abjKT26nO8 wrote: post #5

I don't know anything about serverless --- to this day I fail to understand what this word is even supposed to mean. And the deployment diagram[1] sure looks complicated to me. I think I prefer old-school servers. [1]: " rel="nofollow">https://raw.githubusercontent.com/0x4447/0x4447-product-s3-e...

A fancy word for “hosting for modern web/app”

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#78

Post by vidarh »

scarface74 wrote: post #59
pantalaimon wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pretty much the definition of managed hosting.

When you are just using a VM - it’s your responsibility to keep the VMs and the runtimes patched, design a scaling solution, etc.

Managed hosting is used in at least two different ways:

* As a synonym for dedicated hosting. E.g. you rent a machine, and run what you want on it. And have to patch stuff etc.

* As a separate tier of service above dedicated hosting where the hosting provider is responsible for running the services on the machine. Some managed hosting providers will take responsibility for scaling too, though often it will be a semi-manual process.

Managed hosting in this second sense is to serverless what dedicated hosting is to "regular" cloud instances.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#79

Post by MaxBarraclough »

krapp wrote: post #41
rahuldottech wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's a really dumb term. > Serverless computing is a cloud-computing execution model in which the cloud provider runs the server ...so, there is a server? What's with the name, then?

>...so, there is a server? What's with the name, then? The name is just a marketing gimmick. Absent any other context, "serverless" seems like it must be a paradigm shifting technology so sufficiently advanced that it renders servers obsolete, as if by magic. It's the same sort of trick that people sometimes pull when they show off an application to "do x in 10 lines" (or some absurd low number), when the app is just…

It's an annoying marketing term, sure enough, but the ideas it names aren't terrible. It's not always a mistake to pay someone else to take care of maintenance, scaling and security.

Perhaps managed service would be better?

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#80

Post by chrischattin »

scarface74 wrote: post #37
chrischattin wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. It is a misleading term, imo.

It’s no more “misleading” than having a “bug” in your code. Does anyone with even an iota of computer experience think “Serverless” means that their software is being run by leprechrauns? Nowhere else on HN is willfully not taking the time to learn about technology celebrated except when it comes to cloud concepts.

The more you understand the architecture, the more absurd it sounds to call it serverless.

Edit: Replying to the below comment... No, it's like calling produce you didn't grow yourself but came from a farm, farmless produce.

Post reply on HN