|
|
|
|
|
|
by carmen_sandiego
1812 days ago
|
|
|
The terminology used is a bit confusing. Execution model and application architecture are not the same dimension, so it shouldn't be a comparison between 'monolith' vs 'microservices' vs 'serverless'. The paper seems to use 'microservices' to mean 'containers', but you can make microservices using serverless tech. Heck, you can easily run a monolith on serverless too. Another example: the paper claims that for microservices (aka containers?), most of the security concerns remain for the app owner to deal with, whereas serverless hands much more of that off to the cloud provider. Not really true. The container-based services on GCP/AWS are almost exactly as compatible with the rest of their offerings as FaaS is. You can front container services with CDN/API gateway auth logic the same as you can for FaaS. In fact, you can do that for durable resources too. |
|
|