3 ms·
That looks really complicated to me. What's the advantage of setting up a system like that over a typical server, i.e. with most of that stuff handled by one se
by kmclean 6y ago
That looks really complicated to me. What's the advantage of setting up a system like that over a typical server, i.e. with most of that stuff handled by one server, writing code to coordinate between a few external things (like maybe auth0 and a DB)?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- steve76 6y agoA better separation of concerns. I only have to worry about my function with lambda. With a server, I have to worry about everything that could go wrong with an OS, like new security exploits. Take that concept a step further, and I don't want to worry about my functions. I want to focus on the one place of expertise I do best and build on standard implementations of validation and data transformation.
- carlsborg 6y agoFor the core functionality the only part you touch is the code in the lambdas. Everything comes out of the box if you use a framework like Serverless or SAM. (The step functions, batches, identity, and async pieces you have to configure separately). The number of OSs you patch or upgrade over the course of running this for a few years is... zero. And the time and effort to scale up, run failover tests on your servers, migrate to new hardware ..also zero. But the servers are just a small part of it. The application services around it make it possible to build enterprise grade scalable services with low ops overhead really fast.
- kmclean 6y agoThat sounds really appealing. I really love the sales pitch for serverless stuff. I think I've probably just been exposed to a lot of really advanced ways of setting it up for a big project. It seems complex.