So you're thinking about going serverless: Don't assume it's magically faster and cheaper - AWS especially has variable costing that is difficult to predict before the time

"Deployment time went down by 20 per cent or so, but he was disappointed to find performance around 15 per cent slower than before. The shocker, though, was the cost. His app receives around 10 million requests per day. On Elastic Beanstalk, the cost was around $164 per month. On Lambda and API Gateway, it was going to be around $1,350 per month, had he not spotted the mounting bill and reverted."

Obviously, all cases are different depending on what you deploy but the more and faster options you choose, the more the cost goes up. I also found that with AWS the costing was complexity tied to the technical configuration and CPU usage and other factors, and I opted to move to Digital Ocean which was more fixed cost packages you choose from. "Scaling and high availability" means elastic costs as well...

Salespeople are quick to point out the benefits but make sure you get proper scenario-based costing with some limits in place otherwise you'll move from apples to very expensive oranges. As the article does point out at the end, one advantage of even expensive cloud services is you can turn them off quickly again as you did not make a massive upfront hardware purchase.

See https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/09/24/serverless_tech_slower_and_8_times_more_expensive/

#cloudcomputing #cloud #technology
#^Serverless neither magically faster nor cheaper, dev laments

Seems there is some work involved, as one AWS punter discovers

source https://gadgeteer.co.za/so-youre-thinking-about-going-serverless-dont-assume-its-magically-faster-and-cheaper-aws