#Serverless is a somewhat unhelpfully misleading term for "highly scalable stateless code"
Nah. The point of REST was always to be stateless. It's why rails actually scales and why "scale" as applied to rails was always a joke.
-
-
Pure REST is obviously stateless but what I'd consider a typical rails app is a session-managed web app with predictable URLs, not REST.
-
Also (and again, this is an outsider's impression) is that Rails apps assume a shared central database, which serverless apps would not.
-
But the difference between a 2010-era Rails app and serverless is operational more than it is architectural.
-
A serverless app is assumed to live in a demand-driven infrastructure that can scale instantly to arbitrary numbers of requests.
-
It abstracts away an entire layer of operational responsibility, which makes it attractive to people who are comfortable higher up-stack.
-
Isn't that pretty similar to deploying a rails app to Heroku? Or is there a nuance I'm missing?
-
Serverless apps are expected to run for a few milliseconds at a time (they are billed per ms) and scale instantly from 0 to 000's of rps.
-
So similar in concept but at a couple of orders of magnitude faster startup and shorter duration.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
REST in its original definition referred to network arch, HTTP 1 being an example because each req/resp cycle shares no state with others
-
but I think the term got overloaded a lot to refer to CRUD-style URL patterns, so it’s hard to even discuss now
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.