I think it's more a case of it coming full circle.
People realising that it's just another tool in the toolbox rather than 1 tool that can replace their entire toolbox.
Much of the cynicism seems to come from that.
I do agree with jason though - open ended serverless things charged per use are no fun. Now you can bankrupt yourself at scale with that bug & the 1000 instances.
People place such high expectations for new innovations solving all of their problems. No, it isn't a panacea: apply it only when it makes sense to do so.
I'm yet to meet such people in real life. At places I work people always treated serverless as a tool. Usually solutions would have a little lambda icing on a large monolith cake, so to speak.
I was baffled, bemused even, by the article's premise that anyone rational ever thought serverless was going to take over the software world. It's a tool for solving a certain niche problem, not a general replacement for the vast majority of software we run. It's quite a good example of both the potential benefits and the potential difficulties of working in the cloud.
Whenever I read these articles, I always wonder what proportion of tech buzzwords from the past decade are just obscure ways of saying "someone else's servers", "automation" and "unnecessarily complicated architecture".
>Pay per request needs to be within 2x magnitude of an always on server.
Are any of them? Stuff like cloud run is very competitively priced when assuming base case...but by its very nature it can scale up near infinitely. And with it bugs & bills.
The ability to cap things by 2 order of magnitudes would make me sleep much better. (1 would be better).
They don't, they are all crazy priced which means the cloud providers don't really know what they are doing, forcing people to deploy their own FaaS layers inside their cloud infra, which is a totally valid solution.
Currently, FaaS platforms should be viewed like a cron. The majority of the benefit is if the fn is called in the low thousands per day.
People realising that it's just another tool in the toolbox rather than 1 tool that can replace their entire toolbox.
Much of the cynicism seems to come from that.
I do agree with jason though - open ended serverless things charged per use are no fun. Now you can bankrupt yourself at scale with that bug & the 1000 instances.