As a software architect, I hate serverless. Not because it doesn't work, but because it forces design constraints that cripple your application. Here's why always-on servers matter.
When building an application, consider all options. Serverless is great for background tasks that can be broken up into smaller pieces that you would otherwise need to scale up for main instances to handle, or scale up/down additional instances. It’s great for running background reports that you do t want to build a bunch of routes for.
I would never choose serverless for the whole app architecture, but I might choose one host over another of the distinguishing feature was serverless. It’s really nice to have the option.
When building an application, consider all options. Serverless is great for background tasks that can be broken up into smaller pieces that you would otherwise need to scale up for main instances to handle, or scale up/down additional instances. It’s great for running background reports that you do t want to build a bunch of routes for.
I would never choose serverless for the whole app architecture, but I might choose one host over another of the distinguishing feature was serverless. It’s really nice to have the option.