By Lee Briggs & piers karsenbarg
Translator | Donghui
In the second article on serverless, we will discuss some broader issues. Once again, we do not want to make mandatory provisions. We would like to put forward some ideas to promote discussion among all stakeholders. Many people who say that all applications will be serverless do not run their applications on a large scale, nor do they solve all the problems related to latency, complexity and vendor locking. That’s what we’re talking about here.
What about supplier locking?
How much do you care about vendor lock-in? For example, you may not be able to transfer the serverless architecture in AWS to another cloud provider. Some organizations do not care about vendor lock-in, but many do. If you really care, decide how much you should care before you move on.
How big is your organization?
Server free is a good choice for younger or smaller organizations. Perhaps novice teams in large organizations are directly concerned with delivering value. Once the organization has grown large enough to support teams dedicated to managing infrastructure, and utilization has increased, it may be time to reassess the situation. Large organizations that successfully adopt serverless platforms often succeed through cultural changes. If you are not ready to invest heavily at all levels of your organization to make server free adoption successful, it may be more appropriate to use a more traditional approach (with dedicated teams controlling the supply infrastructure). Finally, as discussed in the previous article, large enterprises may want to consider building an infrastructure platform where technologies such as kubernetes can benefit.
What is the architecture like?
One thing to consider is the significant difference in the way of thinking between serverless products and more “traditional” methods, which means that applications may often need to be redesigned when switching platforms. You may need to consider what the ROI of these architectural changes is. Often, from a time and financial point of view, any application redesign is expensive and can cause problems for even the most successful engineering teams.
Whether you are developing a newly developed application or evaluating an existing application, it is important to consider the architecture of a serverless application. Traditional n-tier architecture or n-tier web applications require a lot of investment to migrate to server free platforms.
In a word, no server can not solve all problems, but many services can be provided in the right place. Remember the following questions:
1. How much do you care about supplier locking?
A serverless architecture cannot simply migrate from one cloud provider to another. To what extent does your organization care about supplier lock-in?
2. What is the size of your organization?
No server is usually better for small organizations. Once you have it staff to support it, you may want to look at more traditional options. Large enterprises may want to study kubernetes.
3. Do you care more about delivering value quickly than providing application transparency?
If you want to bring your application to market as soon as possible, no server may be a good choice. However, you will sacrifice your application’s metrics and insight. As the scale grows, this may lead to real problems.
4. Do you know the properties of the application?
Generally speaking, no server can save money, because you only need to pay for the use time. However, if your application has a long response or startup time, watch carefully. No server can be an expensive option.
5. What is the architecture of your application?
Don’t expect traditional end tier style architectures to work well with serverless applications. Look for applications that can be broken down into smaller components to work together. On the other hand, migrating a serverless application to a server you control also requires rebuilding the application. Do you have time to do it with someone?
6. Is server free a way to bypass it?
Using no server as a way to bypass the IT department may not be the best idea. It’s too easy to write non compliant and vulnerable code. Instead, use the Devops approach and meet with all stakeholders to propose a solution.
7. How safe is it?
There is a problem with the security of the server free architecture. Cloud providers provide some off the shelf options, such as Amazon guardduty, but they may have many limitations that limit the flexibility provided by no server. Implementing secure serverless applications requires a lot of thinking.
This article is reproduced from Serverless Life official account. Please contact the original author.