
Ride the Serverless Wave with DigitalOcean's One-Click Droplet - alexellisuk
https://www.openfaas.com/blog/digitalocean-one-click/
======
013a
"Ride the serverless wave by creating and maintaining a server"

~~~
elliotec
Ok, we get it, “serverless” doesn’t mean “without a server.” its a misnomer.
Can we all accept this now and talk about it underneath the semantics or does
someone have the power to change it industry-wide?

Just feels like every discussion about this technology is hijacked by the
stupid nameto the point it’s all some can focus on.

~~~
minimaxir
Normally, running a serverless App on something like AWS or GCP doesn't
involve _actually setting up a server_ as a part of the workflow.

------
rbosinger
This is just for the MVP. The next phase is to take all those functions,
package them up in a monolithic framework so they can work together and then
deploy to a machine in the office's server closet.

------
lonk
There are shipload of "one-clicks" while doing this.

------
bdcravens
Will we ever get to the point where we can talk about "serverless" (FaaS)
without half the comments being about the term?

~~~
pc86
I've seen plenty of articles about Lambda where aside from one or two quips
about " _Acktually,_ it's not really serverless yanno" the comments are
largely constructive or technical.

But this is "use serverless by setting up and managing one of our servers," so
I think the derision is pretty well placed, and I say that as a huge fan of
DigitalOcean.

------
js4ever
Aws lambda is serverless. This is not because you have to maintain a server

~~~
sidlls
"Serverless" is one of the worst misnomers I've ever seen.

~~~
folkrav
"Serverless" is just "server as a service". Horrible misnomer indeed.

~~~
humblebee
My naive take is that serverless is just a movement back to the simplicity of
ftp + cgi / php. It all looks very similar, just with a different pricing
model, and a different implementation cloud computing vs shared hosting.

~~~
kolanos
In what ways do they look similar?

~~~
motogpjimbo
Not GP, but uploading a single Javascript function to AWS in the form of a zip
file is essentially identical to uploading an individual PHP script to a
shared host via FTP/SFTP. The workflow around that process (or rather, the
lack of workflow) is the same as the process for developing CGI applications
in the 90s/early 2000s.

Of course, Serverless also offers elastic scaling and non-HTTP triggers, so
that's a point of difference.

For all the talk of elastic scaling, I suspect that a lot of people are
enjoying the idea of Serverless at the moment simply because it harks back to
an earlier, pre-framework, pre-workflow approach to web development.

~~~
extra88
The scaling of serverless functions is a pretty major point of difference
between them and SFTPing a PHP script to a shared web host. Another difference
is isolation of your code from anyone else's code; this can vary widely
between shared host vendors but with serverless functions you don't
"neighbors" to worry about, in terms of server load or security (their code
being exploited or your code being exploited).

Serverless functions seems like a nice addition to sites that are 98% static
but need a little server-side code specific to the task.

------
vasilakisfil
on a side note, heroku can be really nice serverless provider. The instances
can be created (using the API) in a couple of seconds. And you can run
anything in it.

~~~
extra88
Are you suggesting that an end user should be able to click a button on your
site that will run client-side JavaScript spin up a Heroku instance to perform
an action? That sounds dangerous and slow. How is destruction of the instance
handled?

~~~
petercooper
Doesn't sound like the world's best idea, but I guess it could potentially
work on things like ETL or maintenance tasks - not so much for quicker, end
user operations at scale.

