Top
Best
New

Posted by operator-name 6 days ago

Serverless Horrors(serverlesshorrors.com)
619 points | 484 commentspage 4
NullCascade 6 days ago|
Troy Hunt and HIBP is a good example in the other direction but Hunt has also been burned plenty of times by serverless.

https://www.troyhunt.com/closer-to-the-edge-hyperscaling-hav...

dinvlad 6 days ago||
Andras (author of Serverless Horrors) knows what he’s talking about.

The amount of brainwashing that big cloud providers have done, is insane.

johnebgd 6 days ago||
We are building bare metal for our workloads… I don’t care if cloud is supposed to be cheaper because it never is. You can get a decent small business firewall to handle 10gbit fiber for $600 from unifi these days. Just another reason I’m glad I moved out of the Bay Area and nyc to a midwestern town for my company. I have a basement and can do rad things in my house to grow my business.
nchmy 6 days ago|
bUt wuT aBowT deV OpS?!
nurettin 6 days ago||
I've had this twice. Once with oracle, once with azure. They both charged me $2000-$5000 for simply opening and closing a database instance (used only for a single day to test a friend's open source project)

To be fair, support was excellent both times and they waived the bills after I explained the situation.

qcnguy 6 days ago|
How did you run up a $5000 bill for just testing a project? What kind of project was it that could put so much load on the DB?
api 6 days ago||
There should also be a general category for "cloud horrors" for things that cost $50k/month to host that would be $1500/month on a bare metal provider like Datapacket or Hetzner.

I'm old enough to remember when cloud was pitched as a big cost saving move. I knew it was bullshit then. Told you so.

nchmy 6 days ago|
even $1500/mo on hetzner is a seriously large app. You could get 300 cpus and 1.5TB of RAM for that price.
mahirsaid 6 days ago||
Seem likes there are mistakes that were made on behalf of the users. The attackers found these mistakes and took advantage of them. i don't think "severless" is the problem.
bapak 6 days ago|
Serverless is the problem in that most serverless services don't let you hard-cap spend.

This issue is serverless-specific. If I pay $20/month on VPN the most frightening thing that can happen is the client calling you about your website being down, not a $100k bill.

princevegeta89 6 days ago||
In my experience: Fuck serverless.

If we're building anything bigger than a random script that does a small unit of work, never go for serverless. A company I recently worked for went with Serverless claiming that it would be less maintenance and overhead.

It absolutely was the worst thing I've ever seen at work. Our application state belonged at different places, we had to deal with many workarounds for simple things like error monitoring, logging, caching etc. Since there was no specific instance running our production code there was no visibility into our actual app configuration in production as well. Small and trivial things that you do in a minute in a platform like Ruby on Rails or Django would take hours if not days to achieve within this so-called blistering serverless setup.

On top of it, we had to go with DB providers like NeonDb and suffer from a massive latency. Add cold starts on top of this and the entire thing was a massive shitshow. Our idiot of a PM kept insisting that we keep serverless despite having all these problems. It was so painful and stupid overall.

kikki 6 days ago|
Why was your PM making tech decisions?
Nextgrid 6 days ago||
Looks like you need the "quiet part" said out loud:

Chances are, the company was fishing for (or at least wouldn't mind) VC investment, which requires things being built a certain (complex and expensive) way like the top "startups" that recently got lots of VC funding.

Chances are, the company wanted an invite to a cloud provider's conference so they could brag about their (self-inflicted) problems and attract visibility (potentially translates to investment - see previous point).

Chances are, a lot of their engineering staff wanted certain resume points to potentially be able to work at such startups in the future.

Chances are, the company wanted some stories about how they're modern and "cloud-native" and how they're solving complex (self-inflicted) problems so they can post it on their engineering blog to attract talent (see previous point).

And so on.

princevegeta89 4 days ago||
Yes. Exactly. The company wanted to be "modern" in terms of tech stack and they kept getting buried in the thought that using serverless would keep them cool. The PM was also close friends with the CEO so everyone blindly nods to him.
shayway 6 days ago||
I guess I'm missing something, why is this 'serverless' horrors? If anything it seems to specifically be serverful horrors.
o11c 6 days ago|
"Serverless" is just marketing-speak for "somebody else's server".
gangtao 5 days ago|
I got a large GCP logstorage bill as my applicatino is writing too much logs
More comments...