4 ms·
Exactly. The cloud is just someone else's computer. It's a genuine business case, as running a lean and secure server farm is no child's play, but it's also ov
by kpil 10y ago
Exactly. The cloud is just someone else's computer.
It's a genuine business case, as running a lean and secure server farm is no child's play, but it's also oversold so much that my eyes hurts.
Actual serverless computing would be implemented as p2p. Possibly interesting in a typical EvilCorpesque large corporation.
Besides, Seti@home (Boinc) have been doing serverless computing for almost 20 years and it wasn't the first implementations.
- inopinatus 10y agoAchieving real-world service objectives via cloud infrastructure requires a different approach to architecture, data management, process design, service ownership, availability, cost management, the list goes on. Some uses of cloud services are superficially comparable to old-school bureau computing. But to say it is "just someone else's computer" is trite, grossly misleading and downright bad advice, because treating it as such will get you burned.
- kpil 10y agoI think we are on the same page here. How about - it's nothing more to it than someone else computer. With all the risks and benefits. If you have the right workload, it is super awesome. If you have a reasonably matching workload and you can spend spend time on all the things you counted, it's also probably good but it's far from a clear-cut certainty. If you have heap of legacy systems you will basically need to rewrite a lot it to make it work, and then it might not be worth it at all. This is the case that is oversold.
- ec109685 10y agoP2P would be using peer computers as servers, so it wouldn't be serverless by your definition.
- kpil 10y agoThat would be computerless computing - seems to a harder problem to solve... P2P was about using non-dedicated computers. It's like the antithesis of the currently marked cloud solutions isn't it?