Lots of bashing here. Please provide clear examples, based on facts. I'm not very interested in how complex you think serverless architecture seems to be. Instead, let us know: What did you try, what was the aim, why did you choose serverless, what was your experience, what did you learn? Make an addition to the discussion.
I'm a solution architect in an environment where 20 teams of five developers each are deploying API- and web-oriented code daily, and have been for a year, on a 100 % serverless architecture. The teams are able to deliver MVPs within days, from scratch. We don't pay for any allocated capacity, only usage. Aside from bonuses such as being able to spin up a complete set of services as a temporary environment, in minutes and for free, the production environment is also incredibly cheap.
I can't say whether this stack would have been as effective if we weren't at the size of benefitting from a microservice way of working, with independent team responsibilities and explicitly defined ownerships. But what I can say is that in my 12+ years in IT, I've never seen developers be this productive. Especially considering the complete development lifecycle.
I'm sure plenty of this would have been possible using a traditional architecture, but having 500 lambdas in production and knowing that you can go home and not get a phone call... pretty nice. The reason being that they are small and thus easily testable and securable, in addition to the obvious (fully managed, auto-scaling etc).
We've had to solve issues of, course. Some silly, some unfortunate. But I wanted to provide a counterweight to the apparently popular opinion that serverless is complicated. To me, that's like looking at a car and complaining that it's more complicated than a train. Both have their use cases.
I'm a solution architect in an environment where 20 teams of five developers each are deploying API- and web-oriented code daily, and have been for a year, on a 100 % serverless architecture. The teams are able to deliver MVPs within days, from scratch. We don't pay for any allocated capacity, only usage. Aside from bonuses such as being able to spin up a complete set of services as a temporary environment, in minutes and for free, the production environment is also incredibly cheap.
I can't say whether this stack would have been as effective if we weren't at the size of benefitting from a microservice way of working, with independent team responsibilities and explicitly defined ownerships. But what I can say is that in my 12+ years in IT, I've never seen developers be this productive. Especially considering the complete development lifecycle.
I'm sure plenty of this would have been possible using a traditional architecture, but having 500 lambdas in production and knowing that you can go home and not get a phone call... pretty nice. The reason being that they are small and thus easily testable and securable, in addition to the obvious (fully managed, auto-scaling etc).
We've had to solve issues of, course. Some silly, some unfortunate. But I wanted to provide a counterweight to the apparently popular opinion that serverless is complicated. To me, that's like looking at a car and complaining that it's more complicated than a train. Both have their use cases.