[HN Gopher] Serverless to monolith - Should serverless lovers be... ___________________________________________________________________ Serverless to monolith - Should serverless lovers be worried? Author : fagnerbrack Score : 30 points Date : 2023-07-01 20:03 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (beabetterdev.com) (TXT) w3m dump (beabetterdev.com) | arter4 wrote: | This is the main insight I got: | | >the original architecture was based on a tool that was not | designed for scale. Based on the article, it read as if this tool | was used for diagnostics to perform ad-hoc assessments of stream | quality. This means it likely wasn't designed for scale or put | through the pressure tests of a formal design document / review. | If that were to happen, any run of the mill Software Engineer | would have been able to recognize the obvious scaling / cost | bottlenecks that would be encountered. | | Lesson learned: ensure your design is sane before turning your | PoC into a full blown production system. | miked85 wrote: | PoCs turning into full blown production systems happens quite | often, even if not planned. | PathOfEclipse wrote: | The real lesson to be learned is to always assume your PoC | will, if successful, get shipped to production pretty much as- | is! | berbec wrote: | hugged. https://archive.is/EDyUx | SoftTalker wrote: | Serverless always seemed to me like a stupid name. Of course | there's a server. It's just not _your_ server. | talideon wrote: | Not unless they're service providers. | angarg12 wrote: | That article has been analyzed to death. Here is a good one from | another ex-Amazon. | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35853148 | beabetterdev wrote: | Daniel here, author of this article. | | Thanks for re-sharing. I was quite disappointed to see the | negative community reaction to the original Amazon article. I | felt that those knocking it didn't analyze the circumstances that | lead to the Serverless Architecture's gaps and just saw some | problems with it and assumed "serverless bad". | | In reality, the series of decisions made a lot of sense. Take | something that exists, try using it, learn from it, and make | better decisions as a result of it. It just so happened that in | this case, serverless architecture was the wrong tool for the job | and dedicated machines were a better fit. | | Anyways, happy to see my take being shared. If you enjoy this | kind of content, I have a newsletter and Youtube channel where I | discuss / make videos about more AWS & cloud concepts: | | Newsletter: https://mailinglist.beabetterdev.com Youtube: | https://www.youtube.com/c/BeABetterDev | | Cheers, | | Daniel | cagenut wrote: | you can run a giant multi-gb monolith serverlessly. just because | you use lambda doesnt mean you need to use dozens of them. | piyh wrote: | Agreed, serverless and monolith are not on the same spectrum | [deleted] | Scubabear68 wrote: | It is almost ridiculously common anti-pattern these days to see | teams stringing lambda functions together for no good reason | other then "cuz serverless", or "microservices", for what really | should be just function calls in a single process. | | Developers are losing touch on what process boundaries mean, and | the result is brittle and poor performing systems. | intothemild wrote: | Hype driven development. | arwhatever wrote: | Once had a coworker advocate for microservices because "you | split everything into separate services and they all just work" | quote, unquote. I've wondered ever since how typical that | mindset might be whenever I hear anyone else pushing for | similar such solutions. | goostavos wrote: | I regularly review design from teams that turn reading a file | from S3 and putting into into a database into, well, something | that requires a design review. Some horrific monstrosity of | step functions, lambdas, and glue. All because they've been | told that serverless is the correct way to build "scalable" | software. | | If every time you add a new feature to your application you | also have to add new _infrastructure_ , I feel very, very | strongly that you're doing it wrong. Sometimes? Sure. Every | time? Embarrassing. | | Cloud providers are surely pleased as punch that there is now | an entire generation of developers that will argue vehemently | that infrastructure that _only_ grows over time is not only | healthy, but the best way to build scalable software. | | I have no idea what to call it other than "Marketing Material | Driven Development". | hawk_ wrote: | Resume driven development. | | And on the flipside - One of the funniest justifications I | have heard for companies using new fangled untried tech is to | attract talent - no one wants to work on boring tech | apparently for the fear of being outdated. | beabetterdev wrote: | Some call it "Promotion Driven Development" :) | [deleted] | coredog64 wrote: | > Some horrific monstrosity of step functions, lambdas, and | glue | | I could see that. Lambda has a 15 minute timeout, and if | you're processing something large you want an orchestrator | that can manage retries. I don't like the SFN developer | experience, but it's only like 15% worse than boto3. | BXlnt2EachOther wrote: | I have heard "Promotion-Driven Development" (when it's from | the team/eng side) ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-07-01 23:00 UTC)