I agree with this. My own gripes with those who fell for the 'serverless' tech-evangelism lies particularly with those who deployed 'functions as the unit of d

I agree with this. My own gripes with those who fell for the 'serverless' tech-evangelism lies particularly with those who deployed 'functions as the unit of deployment and scaling'. At best this is an unattainable ideal that's too pure, impractical and abstracted from the problems developers need to solve. A system of single function processes communicating with a message passing framework is effectively an actor model. And while the actor model is a beautiful way of solving problems, slavish devotion to it will become a hinderance quickly. Practically 'serverless' is a kind of an operating system to rent. Rather than Linux and Nginx managing the process invocation, you devolve that to the cloud provider that shares that resource (as if you're on shared hosting). Often people fail to see this and think 'serverless' demands a new architecture, when there's absolutely no reason to. I always get a bit scared when I see a 'serverless' project; usually the developers throw away all of their conventions leaving an unstructured incoherent mess.