[lghh]

> are there real-world, commercial products actually running on """serverless""" architecture?

Yeah, thousands I would imagine. The last two companies I have worked at have been 100% serverless or nearly 100%.

> no matter how much I think about that whole concept, I see no application for it that couldn't be done better, faster and easier with regular tools

Considering you have to ask if there are _any_ products running in a serverless environment, I would imagine you need more exposure to the concept before you make such a large judgement on it.

[capableweb]

> Yeah, thousands I would imagine. The last two companies I have worked at have been 100% serverless or nearly 100%.

If you can answer (for legal or other reasons you might not be able to): What kind of monthly bills did your setup have and how many req/s did you serve (in lack of a better metric)? It'd also be useful to know average min/max response time if that's something you remember.

I wish that was a good way of evaluating "performance / price" but that's really hard... If someone know a better way to frame the question regarding price, it would be very helpful.

[lghh]

I can't list that, but both companies migrated to serverless and both companies are glad they did.

There is more than "raw dollar amount on monthly bill" to account for in cost, as well. For one, there's stability and the toll that takes on both your team and your customers. Not saying non-serverless apps are not stable by nature, but I've now been part of two teams that have seen the same types of benefits and those benefits line up with the "sales pitch" benefits.

[qweqwerwerwerwr]

what was the product and the scale then?

[lghh]

I'd rather not list my last two companies or their scale, but I can assure you they are real companies that exist, have users, and make money. I'm not sure why I even would be asked to.