Re:Serverless: slower and more expensive
by scarface74 on Monday September 23, 2019 @09:37AM
(#21048782)
Heroku is just an easier way to deploy to servers. It doesn’t scale down to zero, scale up as needed, etc. You still have distinct servers that you know about, can manage. S3, Fargate (Docker), DynamoDB, even SNS/SQS are considered Serverless by AWS’s nomenclature.
Re:Serverless: slower and more expensive
by pas on Wednesday September 25, 2019 @04:26AM
(#21068860)
It doesn't scale to zero, but the article was about how much more it costs running only serverless 0-24, but how hard it is to fiddle with Linux/deployment/CNAMEs/etc. (Especially that they have constant load, 10+M req/day.)
And so it seems to miss the obvious middle ground between raw EC2 (or Elastic Beanstalk managed EC2) and full on-demand Lambda, which is modern managed hosting (PaaS, Deis/Dokku/Heroku).
Re:Serverless: slower and more expensive
by cdelsolar on Monday September 23, 2019 @11:55AM
(#21050075)
i'm not sure Fargate is considered Serverless.
Re:Serverless: slower and more expensive
by scarface74 on Monday September 23, 2019 @12:33PM
(#21050513)
“What is Serverless Architecture”
https://aws.amazon.com/lambda/serverless-architectures-learn...
https://aws.amazon.com/fargate/
AWS Fargate is a compute engine for Amazon ECS that allows you to run containers without having to manage servers or clusters. With AWS Fargate, you no longer have to provision, configure, and scale clusters of virtual machines to run containers
Heroku seems to be serverless in the way cloud vendors, including Amazon, have been using it recently; it's not serverless in the sense that Amazon first introduced it, which was a synonym for Lambda. It's pretty similar to GAE, which is definitely within the current usage of “serverless”.