4 ms·

I'm not sure if we're on the same page here. When I said "cloud providers make this option cheaper than traditional servers" I meant it as in the pricing struct

I'm not sure if we're on the same page here. When I said "cloud providers make this option cheaper than traditional servers" I meant it as in the pricing structure/plans of cloud providers. That's why I tried to contrive a scenario to make a better point. Meanwhile your definition of cost seems to center on performance and org overheads a team might incur. You say that serverless will cost more "to prevent noisy neighbor effects"...but that is an abstraction most cloud providers will already give you. Something you already pay your provider for. So my DA point now is, is it cheaper to pay them to handle this or is it cheaper to shell out your own and manage manually?

barrkel 6y ago
> You say that serverless will cost more "to prevent noisy neighbor effects"...but that is an abstraction most cloud providers will already give you I actually wasn't talking about serverless at any point - I understand that term to mostly mean FaaS and don't map it to things like k8s without extra stuff on top, which is closer to where I'd position microservices - a service is a combo of data + compute, not a stateless serverless function. But I agree we're not quite talking about the same things. And unfortunately I don't care enough to figure out how to line it up. :) Org factors rather than cloud compute costs are why you go microservice rather than monolith was my main point, I think.