Serverless Architecture
Serverless architecture has become a buzzword in the tech industry, promising scalability, cost savings, and simplified infrastructure management. But does it really live up to the hype? In this article, we’ll explore what serverless architecture is, why it’s popular, its ideal use cases, and situations where it might not be the best choice. We’ll also dive deep into Function as a Service (FaaS) and discuss whether you can recreate serverless solutions on-premise.
What is serverless architecture?
Serverless architecture is a cloud computing model where the cloud provider dynamically manages the allocation of machine resources like CPU, RAM and disk space. Unlike traditional server setups where you need to manage server infrastructure. With this shift, serverless lets you focus more on development of your applications. The deployment of your microservice or code will be fully automated. Also this way of working and deploying code will work very well with event driven architecture to execute code. Cloud providers will have (serverless) services to help you with your serverless, event driven architecture. for example: AWS has EventBridge and SNS, whereas GCP offers eventarc and Pub/Sub. With all the different services and tools cloud providers offer it is possible to create a product without ever needing to manage a server. In a nutshell, serverless means you can deploy applications without having to worry about server management. The name might be a bit of a misnomer, though, as servers are still involved; you just don’t have to handle them.
Why is it hyped?
Serverless architecture got attention for multiple reasons, let’s look at a few of them.
Scalability
Serverless automatically scales your application in response to the load. Whether you have a sudden spike in traffic or a quiet period, serverless ensures your application adjusts accordingly. But we have to keep in mind there are limits to how far certain services can scale to ensure stability. This makes it important to always closely monitor your architecture.
Cost effective
You only pay for what you use. There’s no need to reserve and pay for idle server capacity. This goes hand in hand with scalability, so that when a load is highly unpredictable you dont waste resources on a safety margin or when the load is close to zero. But we have to keep in mind that serverless is not the most cost effective in all scenarios.
Less maintenance
It is true server management and some infrastructure-related tasks will be bypassed. But don’t fire your engineers just yet as even serverless architecture has to be managed although type of work will change. you will still need monitoring to ensure stability and to identify bottlenecks and issues in your architecture. The focus will shift from metrics to execution times, errors and cold starts and perhaps throttle limits, no OS upgrades but ensuring proper configuration of your API gateway, CDN or cloud functions. Probably the most important of all will be the management of roles and permissions for all the different components.
Does it deserve the hype? How can it be cheaper?
The hype around serverless is largely justified, especially considering the benefits in certain scenarios. However, it’s important to evaluate if serverless fits your specific needs. Here’s how serverless can be more cost-effective:
Highly variable and unpredictable loads
For applications experiencing fluctuating traffic, such as event ticketing or alerting systems, serverless offers instant scaling. It adjusts resources in real-time, ensuring your application remains responsive and available without over-provisioning infrastructure.
Event-driven architecture
Serverless is perfect for event-driven applications where functions are triggered by specific events, such as data uploads, user interactions, or system messages. For instance, AWS Lambda can execute a function when a file is uploaded to S3, making it an ideal choice for real-time data processing.
Low load applications
When an application does not need a lot of resources to function, serverless is a great option. This is perfect for some jobs that have to run only once a day for a few minutes, for example gathering, consolidating and exporting your cloud costs for the day.
Another great example is a static website for an event. S3 can host the website and cloudfront can ensure response times all over the world and manage your SSL certificates. When implementing this for a customer the cost to keep the website running was about 60 cents per month! 50 cent was for the DNS and hosted zone, the other 10 cent was for the data in S3 and traffic through cloudfront.
When not to use serverless
Despite its advantages, serverless isn’t a silver bullet for all scenarios. When not to use something is maybe even more valuable than knowing when it is! Here are some cases where serverless may not be the best fit:
High throughput, low latency requirements
Because of “cold starts”, resource limits and because these serverless services still have external dependencies to deliver the wanted capability this can impact latency and throughput. When low latency and high throughput are a must, serverless is probably not the right solution. For example, an online multiplayer gaming platform might not benefit from a serverless solution. Of course, any supporting systems like an emailing service might still benefit a lot!
Long-running processes
Serverless functions usually have execution time limits (e.g., AWS Lambda’s 15 minutes). Applications requiring long-running processes might face challenges with these constraints. there are serverless platforms like AWS Batch 00where this time limit is less of an issue, but by then it might also be a lot more efficient to run your computing job on a server that you start and stop whenever it’s needed. It all depends on the specific use case.
Complex deployment dependencies
Applications with complex deployment requirements or those needing extensive local development environments might find serverless architecture limiting. Serverless platforms often don’t fully support all necessary dependencies or configurations. In such cases, you may need to rely on integrating multiple third-party services to provide missing functionality or rearchitecting parts of your application to fit within the serverless paradigm. Such workarounds can introduce operational complexity, technical debt, and dependency on external providers for critical components, which in turn may affect scalability, performance, and troubleshooting. Therefore, for highly customized or complex deployments, a more traditional infrastructure might be more suitable than serverless, unless the platform evolves to support those needs natively.
Some things to consider
There are other things to consider that might deter companies from switching to a serverless architecture:
- Vendor lock in: Because the serverless solutions are highly specific to the cloud provider, it might become difficult to migrate to a different provider once you use more of the vendor specific services. Often cloud providers offer similar solutions but they are rarely exactly the same.
- Complexity: Serverless solutions might look less complex at a distance, it can often be very complex to troubleshoot or debug. This is because of the distributed nature of serverless architecture. Several services and platforms working together might make it hard to trace issues spanning these, so implementing the right monitoring and logging practices is key to avoid this.
- Stateless: Many serverless services are stateless, sometimes adding complexity when memory of previous invocations is needed.
- Security: Your system infrastructure is outside your control. When working with sensitive data this could be a dealbreaker.
Wrapping up
Serverless architecture offers significant advantages, particularly in scenarios requiring scalability, cost-effectiveness, and reduced maintenance. Its ability to handle event-driven applications and manage variable loads makes it an appealing choice for many modern enterprises. However, like any technology, it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. The potential drawbacks, such as latency issues, execution limits, and vendor lock-in, must be carefully weighed against the benefits. As with any architectural decision, understanding the specific needs and constraints of your application is crucial. By doing so, you can determine whether serverless architecture truly aligns with your goals or if a more traditional approach would better serve your needs.
Are you curious if your business will benefit from a serverless approach? Feel free to reach out, our engineers can guide you to a fitting solution!
