4 ms·

How is it serverless if it runs on an Amazon server? Also, how is it serverless if you need to consume a service? (AWS in this case)... Every time I see someth

How is it serverless if it runs on an Amazon server? Also, how is it serverless if you need to consume a service? (AWS in this case)... Every time I see something nice, there is this increasing chance that I'm gonna end up sad because it requires some sort of external provider like AWS, DO, Heroku, GCE... I don't have any of those and I don't want any of them.

btown 10y ago
"Serverless" here refers to not needing a pre-requisitioned server to exist in advance of the request. Sure, the physical hardware exists in AWS, but previously you'd need to have some sort of CI system running on a server that needs to be running and accepting web requests at any time that you might push to Github. With AWS Lambda, which LambCI is run on, a lightweight server boots up in realtime in response to that webhook, runs code, and shuts down. So you have a CI server that can respond any time of the day or night, but only consumes resources when it's actually running.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  Serverless is a fairly new and content-free buzzword specific to lambda. To the extent it is sometimes rationalized as communicating something meaningful, it's not something distinct from what almost every PaaS ever has always provided. (Lambda is distinct from earlier PaaS's, and other solutions which mimic Lambda have emerged, but the way in which they are distinct from most earlier PaaS offerings isn't part of how people try to rationalize "serverless" and wouldn't really fit into such a rationalization.
- inopinatus 10y ago
  Serverless also describes the application invocation model. The design intention for serverless applications uses pub-sub events rather than client-server calls. That's a major enabler of async processing and containers-on-demand, and it looks like LambCI has followed the pattern to a tee. If you have to accept requests from a non-event-driven world, AWS offer their API Gateway to provide a listening server endpoint, but I think it's telling that this was not available when Lambda was released, and that LambCI does not need it.
- oneplane 10y ago
  The point I was trying to make is that it seems like people don't want to make actual services or servers, but rather depend on some sort of closed loop or ecosystem elsewhere, and if you happen to not use that, you can't use the nice stuff they put up on GitHub.
runesoerensen 10y ago
The author address this question in the announcement blog post (under "PS: Hating on “serverless”?"): https://medium.com/@hichaelmart/lambci-4c3e29d6599b#.3nieqgg33 https://medium.com/@hichaelmart/lambci-4c3e29d6599b#.3nieqgg...
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  "Well. Look. I’m not going to defend it to the death, but I don’t think it’s anywhere near as bad as some suggest. It’s a term people are using to describe architectures in which you don’t deal with anything resembling a server, or an instance, or similar." How you can tell OP has very little experience with AWS services being broken for hours before the little "i" gets added to the service on their status board.
  - AlexCoventry 10y ago
    > AWS services being broken for hours before the little "i" Are these failures being systematically tracked and documented somewhere?
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      AWS Status Board I refer to: http://status.aws.amazon.com/ http://status.aws.amazon.com/ Down detector seems to show when they've had historical issues: http://downdetector.com/status/aws-amazon-web-services http://downdetector.com/status/aws-amazon-web-services Other HN comments about AWS' Status Board not being "faithful": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9809315 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9809315 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11839846 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11839846 "It will take a direct hit with nuclear weapon on the datacenter for Amazon to change icon to red on service status page." "Still down 5 hours later. ELB won't register instances. Ugh" https://www.google.com/search?q=aws+status+hackernews https://www.google.com/search?q=aws+status+hackernews "Serverless" is not magic. Its only hiding the pain until its excruciating (service down, you wait until someone else fixes it).
      - 10y ago
bigiain 10y ago
There is no "serverless", there is only "the cloud". There is no "cloud", there is only "someone else's computers".
- bbcbasic 10y ago
  It's just some timeshare on the mainframe
  - inopinatus 10y ago
    You may jest, but when talking to CIOs wary of cloud computing, the comparison to old-school bureau computing does help.
bbcbasic 10y ago
I'm suspicious because anything slightly critical of AWS or their terminology has been heavily downvoted in this thread.
- hn_user2 10y ago
  Not a down voter. But it's possible the down votes are for the comments spending time complaining about using the term "serverless" instead of something like "FaaS", and not for the criticism of AWS. As a huge fan of FaaS its sad that half the discussions become arguing over what to call it.

btown 10y ago

"Serverless" here refers to not needing a pre-requisitioned server to exist in advance of the request. Sure, the physical hardware exists in AWS, but previously you'd need to have some sort of CI system running on a server that needs to be running and accepting web requests at any time that you might push to Github. With AWS Lambda, which LambCI is run on, a lightweight server boots up in realtime in response to that webhook, runs code, and shuts down. So you have a CI server that can respond any time of the day or night, but only consumes resources when it's actually running.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 10y ago
Serverless is a fairly new and content-free buzzword specific to lambda. To the extent it is sometimes rationalized as communicating something meaningful, it's not something distinct from what almost every PaaS ever has always provided. (Lambda is distinct from earlier PaaS's, and other solutions which mimic Lambda have emerged, but the way in which they are distinct from most earlier PaaS offerings isn't part of how people try to rationalize "serverless" and wouldn't really fit into such a rationalization.
inopinatus 10y ago
Serverless also describes the application invocation model. The design intention for serverless applications uses pub-sub events rather than client-server calls. That's a major enabler of async processing and containers-on-demand, and it looks like LambCI has followed the pattern to a tee. If you have to accept requests from a non-event-driven world, AWS offer their API Gateway to provide a listening server endpoint, but I think it's telling that this was not available when Lambda was released, and that LambCI does not need it.
oneplane 10y ago
The point I was trying to make is that it seems like people don't want to make actual services or servers, but rather depend on some sort of closed loop or ecosystem elsewhere, and if you happen to not use that, you can't use the nice stuff they put up on GitHub.

runesoerensen 10y ago

The author address this question in the announcement blog post (under "PS: Hating on “serverless”?"): https://medium.com/@hichaelmart/lambci-4c3e29d6599b#.3nieqgg33 https://medium.com/@hichaelmart/lambci-4c3e29d6599b#.3nieqgg...

toomuchtodo 10y ago
"Well. Look. I’m not going to defend it to the death, but I don’t think it’s anywhere near as bad as some suggest. It’s a term people are using to describe architectures in which you don’t deal with anything resembling a server, or an instance, or similar." How you can tell OP has very little experience with AWS services being broken for hours before the little "i" gets added to the service on their status board.
- AlexCoventry 10y ago
  > AWS services being broken for hours before the little "i" Are these failures being systematically tracked and documented somewhere?
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    AWS Status Board I refer to: http://status.aws.amazon.com/ http://status.aws.amazon.com/ Down detector seems to show when they've had historical issues: http://downdetector.com/status/aws-amazon-web-services http://downdetector.com/status/aws-amazon-web-services Other HN comments about AWS' Status Board not being "faithful": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9809315 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9809315 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11839846 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11839846 "It will take a direct hit with nuclear weapon on the datacenter for Amazon to change icon to red on service status page." "Still down 5 hours later. ELB won't register instances. Ugh" https://www.google.com/search?q=aws+status+hackernews https://www.google.com/search?q=aws+status+hackernews "Serverless" is not magic. Its only hiding the pain until its excruciating (service down, you wait until someone else fixes it).
    - 10y ago

bigiain 10y ago

There is no "serverless", there is only "the cloud". There is no "cloud", there is only "someone else's computers".

bbcbasic 10y ago
It's just some timeshare on the mainframe
- inopinatus 10y ago
  You may jest, but when talking to CIOs wary of cloud computing, the comparison to old-school bureau computing does help.

bbcbasic 10y ago

I'm suspicious because anything slightly critical of AWS or their terminology has been heavily downvoted in this thread.

hn_user2 10y ago
Not a down voter. But it's possible the down votes are for the comments spending time complaining about using the term "serverless" instead of something like "FaaS", and not for the criticism of AWS. As a huge fan of FaaS its sad that half the discussions become arguing over what to call it.