> I totally see the advantages, but how many benefit from that? Most companies don't need to deploy on servers world-wide, and don't need infinite scaling. Tha

> I totally see the advantages, but how many benefit from that? Most companies don't need to deploy on servers world-wide, and don't need infinite scaling. That’s a good question. I think serverless has a lot to offer, global compute, and infinite scaling are a subset of features. I think it really comes down to your specific workload—it’s definitely not a be all end all silver bullet One example I can think of I mentioned in another comment in this article which I have pasted below: the first company I worked at was very small, under 30 people, sales included, and I was hired on as an SA. If they were using serverless, they would not have needed to hire me. Deployments and system upgrades were very toilsome. The dev lead would spend a few hours deploying new code and we’d only do it around midnight in case there was a problem (our customers were almost entirely US based). I spent a lot of my time automating OS upgrades on the web servers behind our proxy. All of this work would be unnecessary for that small company if they were using serverless. Additionally, as mentioned before, the majority of their traffic was during the day so they could have scaled down automatically at night, cutting costs. Would this be cheaper than running machines 24/7? I’m not sure, but I could see why you’d be interested in at least looking into it