DOCSLIB.ORG

Architectural Implications of Function-As-A-Service Computing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Architectural Implications of Function-As-A-Service Computing Architectural Implications of Function-as-a-Service Computing Mohammad Shahrad Jonathan Balkind David Wentzlaff Princeton University Princeton University Princeton University Princeton, USA Princeton, USA Princeton, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT Network Serverless computing is a rapidly growing cloud application model, popularized by Amazon’s Lambda platform. Serverless cloud ser- Scheduling vices provide fine-grained provisioning of resources, which scale Platform (priorwork) automatically with user demand. Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) appli- Queueing Management cations follow this serverless model, with the developer providing 35% decrease in IPC Interference their application as a set of functions which are executed in response due to interference 6x variation due to to a user- or system-generated event. Functions are designed to Memory BW invocation pattern 20x MPKI for be short-lived and execute inside containers or virtual machines, Branch MPKI >10x exec time short functions introducing a range of system-level overheads. This paper studies for short functions Cold Start Server the architectural implications of this emerging paradigm. Using (500ms cold start) Up to 20x (thispaper) Container the commercial-grade Apache OpenWhisk FaaS platform on real slowdown servers, this work investigates and identifies the architectural im- Native plications of FaaS serverless computing. The workloads, along with Execution Figure 1: We characterize the server-level overheads of the way that FaaS inherently interleaves short functions from many Function-as-a-Service applications, compared to native exe- tenants frustrates many of the locality-preserving architectural cution. This contrasts with prior work [2–5] which focused structures common in modern processors. In particular, we find on platform-level or end-to-end issues, relying heavily on that: FaaS containerization brings up to 20x slowdown compared reverse engineering of commercial services’ behavior. to native execution, cold-start can be over 10x a short function’s execution time, branch mispredictions per kilo-instruction are 20x higher for short functions, memory bandwidth increases by 6x due 1 INTRODUCTION to the invocation pattern, and IPC decreases by as much as 35% Serverless computing is a relatively new paradigm in cloud com- due to inter-function interference. We open-source FaaSProfiler, puting, first launched by Amazon’s AWS Lambda [1] in November the FaaS testing and profiling platform that we developed for this 2014. In serverless, the cloud provider manages the provisioning work. of resources for a service in a transparent, auto-scaling manner, without the developer in the loop. The developer is charged in a fine- CCS CONCEPTS grained way, proportional to the resources provisioned and used • Information systems → Enterprise resource planning; Com- per request, with no cost levied when the service is idle (receiving puting platforms; • Computer systems organization → Ar- no requests). chitectures. Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) is a key enabler of serverless com- puting. FaaS gets its name as it is a way to scale the execution KEYWORDS of simple, standalone, developer-written functions, where state is serverless, function-as-a-service, faas, cloud, OpenWhisk, architec- not kept across function invocations. Functions in FaaS are event- ture driven, invoked by a user’s HTTP request or another type of event created within the provider’s platform. To match the rate of func- ACM Reference Format: tion invocations, the platform automatically scales the resources Mohammad Shahrad, Jonathan Balkind, and David Wentzlaff. 2019. Ar- available to execute more instances of the developer’s function in chitectural Implications of Function-as-a-Service Computing. In The 52nd Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO- parallel. 52), October 12–16, 2019, Columbus, OH, USA. ACM, New York, NY, USA, The majority of serverless research has targeted mapping ap- 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3352460.3358296 plications to this model, or has focused on scheduling policies or mechanisms for orchestrating FaaS setups. However, we are inter- Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed ested to know if the computational building blocks of FaaS, namely, for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation commodity servers used in modern cloud data centers are suitable on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the for such workloads. FaaS applications differ from traditional author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission cloud workloads in ways that may jeopardize common ar- and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]. chitectural wisdom. MICRO-52, October 12–16, 2019, Columbus, OH, USA Firstly, FaaS functions are typically short-lived and priced in © 2019 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-6938-1/19/10...$15.00 multiples of a 1ms, 10ms, or 100ms time quantum. Function ex- https://doi.org/10.1145/3352460.3358296 ecution time is usually also capped. Providers must rely on the MICRO-52, October 12–16, 2019, Columbus, OH, USA Mohammad Shahrad, Jonathan Balkind, and David Wentzlaff fine-grained interleaving of many short functions to achieve high 2 BACKGROUND throughput. This fine-grained interleaving causes temporal The ideas behind serverless and FaaS have developed over a long locality-exploiting structures like branch predictors to un- period [7], but only formed into commercial services within the derperform, raising questions about present-day computer last few years. FaaS takes lessons from Infrastructure-as-a-Service architectures’ ability to execute FaaS efficiently. For instance, (IaaS), Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS), and microservices, but brings we observe a 20x increase in branch mispredictions per kilo-instruction with it completely new pricing, development, and provisioning (MPKI) when comparing our shortest functions to longer functions. models. This finding and others are shown in Figure 1. Secondly, functions often run in a deeply virtualized manner: 2.1 Differences with Other Cloud Models inside containers which might run within virtual machines. This FaaS is unlike traditional cloud models like IaaS and PaaS, and has causes a number of OS-level overheads. We find that flat overheads significant differences with newer models such as microservices like the cold start latency of 500ms or more have an outsized impact which have recently been thoroughly studied [8–10]. Differences on short functions. of FaaS from prior models include: Lastly, FaaS developers can write their functions in almost any • The FaaS developer does not provision or manage the servers language. Each platform has preferred languages, but developers that functions run on. This means there is no management may upload their own container to run a chosen application in of compute bottlenecks by developers. the FaaS environment. Together, these features make for a highly • Functions are abstracted from machine type. Most providers dynamic system, with many, fast-changing components, which we do not guarantee a machine type, nor do they price differen- have found bring new, unforeseen overheads and challenges for tially based on them. architectural optimization. • Functions are used to increase server utilization. As such, We provide the first server-level characterization of a Function- functions are often in contention with traditional applica- as-a-Service platform by carefully investigating a compute node of tions using the same server. an open-source FaaS platform, Apache OpenWhisk (sold commer- • FaaS is priced at a fine granularity, based on resource utiliza- cially as IBM Cloud Functions [6]). This contrasts with previous tion, not per API call. FaaS brings cloud computing closer to work solely focusing on black-box reverse-engineering of commer- a compute-as-utility model. cial FaaS systems [2–5]. With full control of our deployment, we • The developer is only charged for their function’s execution precisely induce function co-location and access hardware perfor- time based on memory usage. This ignores platform (e.g. mance counters, something impossible for an external black-box network, cluster-level scheduling, queuing) and system-level analysis. Our bottom-up approach enables us to decouple overheads details (e.g. container management and OS scheduling) and in managing the cloud platform from the overheads caused in the motivates the provider to minimize these overheads. server context. This reveals the architectural implications of FaaS • Similar to microservices, functions are typically very short computing. (O(100ms)). This is in contrast to common cloud and pro- We identify a range of new overheads that affect FaaS execution cessor architectures that expect long-running applications. with short functions affected most acutely. Figure 1 summarizes The overheads of handling these short functions can further these overheads in the context of the full stack of overheads. worsen the problem of low utilization in cloud servers [11– Our contributions are as follows: 13]. Moreover, due to high parallelism, performance
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Towards a Security-Aware Benchmarking Framework for Function-As-A-Service
    Towards a Security-Aware Benchmarking Framework for Function-as-a-Service Roland Pellegrini1, Igor Ivkic1 and Markus Tauber1 1University of Applied Sciences Burgenland, Eisenstadt, Austria {1610781022, igor.ivkic, markus.tauber}@fh-burgenland.at Keywords: Cloud Computing, Benchmarking, Cloud Security, Framework, Function-as-a-Service Abstract: In a world, where complexity increases on a daily basis the Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) cloud model seams to take countermeasures. In comparison to other cloud models, the fast evolving FaaS increasingly abstracts the underlying infrastructure and refocuses on the application logic. This trend brings huge benefits in application and performance but comes with difficulties for benchmarking cloud applications. In this position paper, we present an initial investigation of benchmarking FaaS in close to reality production systems. Furthermore, we outline the architectural design including the necessary benchmarking metrics. We also discuss the possibility of using the proposed framework for identifying security vulnerabilities. 1 INTRODUCTION illustrates the technical workflow between the components: Cloud computing, as defined by Mell and Grance (2011), is a model for enabling on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable resources. Cloud vendors provide these resources in the service models Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform- as-a-Service (PaaS) and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). Through virtualization, the IaaS service model provides computing resources (e.g.: servers, storage, network) to consumers so they can deploy Figure 1: FaaS architecture, based on Pientka (2017) and run software. In other words, the consumers do not control the infrastructure, but are able to manage However, Cloud Service Providers (CSP) often the running operating systems and applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Benchmarking, Analysis, and Optimization of Serverless Function Snapshots
    Benchmarking, Analysis, and Optimization of Serverless Function Snapshots Dmitrii Ustiugov∗ Plamen Petrov Marios Kogias† University of Edinburgh University of Edinburgh Microsoft Research United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom Edouard Bugnion Boris Grot EPFL University of Edinburgh Switzerland United Kingdom ABSTRACT CCS CONCEPTS Serverless computing has seen rapid adoption due to its high scala- • Computer systems organization ! Cloud computing; • In- bility and flexible, pay-as-you-go billing model. In serverless, de- formation systems ! Computing platforms; Data centers; • velopers structure their services as a collection of functions, spo- Software and its engineering ! n-tier architectures. radically invoked by various events like clicks. High inter-arrival time variability of function invocations motivates the providers KEYWORDS to start new function instances upon each invocation, leading to cloud computing, datacenters, serverless, virtualization, snapshots significant cold-start delays that degrade user experience. To reduce ACM Reference Format: cold-start latency, the industry has turned to snapshotting, whereby Dmitrii Ustiugov, Plamen Petrov, Marios Kogias, Edouard Bugnion, and Boris an image of a fully-booted function is stored on disk, enabling a Grot. 2021. Benchmarking, Analysis, and Optimization of Serverless Func- faster invocation compared to booting a function from scratch. tion Snapshots . In Proceedings of the 26th ACM International Conference on This work introduces vHive, an open-source framework for Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems serverless experimentation with the goal of enabling researchers (ASPLOS ’21), April 19–23, 2021, Virtual, USA. ACM, New York, NY, USA, to study and innovate across the entire serverless stack. Using 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3445814.3446714 vHive, we characterize a state-of-the-art snapshot-based serverless infrastructure, based on industry-leading Containerd orchestra- 1 INTRODUCTION tion framework and Firecracker hypervisor technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Nfaas: Named Function As a Service Michał Król Ioannis Psaras University College London University College London [email protected] [email protected]
    NFaaS: Named Function as a Service Michał Król Ioannis Psaras University College London University College London [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT functionality to be incorporated. Powerful end-user devices and In the past, the Information-centric networking (ICN) community new applications (e.g., augmented reality [1]) demand minimum has focused on issues mainly pertaining to traditional content de- service delay, while the Internet of Things (IoT) [2] generates huge livery (e.g., routing and forwarding scalability, congestion control amounts of data that flow in the reverse direction from traditional and in-network caching). However, to keep up with future Internet flows (that is, from the edge towards the core for processing). As architectural trends the wider area of future Internet paradigms, a result, computation needs to be brought closer to the edge to there is a pressing need to support edge/fog computing environ- support minimum service latencies and to process huge volumes ments, where cloud functionality is available more proximate to of IoT data. where the data is generated and needs processing. In contrast to cloud computing, edge and fog computing promote With this goal in mind, we propose Named Function as a Service the usage of resources located closer to the network edge to be (NFaaS), a framework that extends the Named Data Networking used by multiple different applications, effectively reducing the architecture to support in-network function execution. In contrast transmission delay and the amount of traffic flowing towards the to existing works, NFaaSbuilds on very lightweight VMs and allows network core.
    [Show full text]
  • Qualifikationsprofil #10309
    QUALIFIKATIONSPROFIL #10309 ALLGEMEINE DATEN Geburtsjahr: 1972 Ausbildung: Abitur Diplom, Informatik, (TU, Kaiserslautern) Fremdsprachen: Englisch, Französisch Spezialgebiete: Kubernetes KENNTNISSE Tools Active Directory Apache Application Case CATIA CVS Eclipse Exchange Framework GUI Innovator ITIL J2EE JMS LDAP Lotus Notes make MS Exchange MS Outlook MS-Exchange MS-Office MS-Visual Studio NetBeans OSGI RACF SAS sendmail Together Turbine UML VMWare .NET ADS ANT ASP ASP.NET Flash GEnie IDES Image Intellij IDEA IPC Jackson JBOSS Lex MS-Visio ODBC Oracle Application Server OWL PGP SPSS SQS TesserAct Tivoli Toolbook Total Transform Visio Weblogic WebSphere YACC Tätigkeiten Administration Analyse Beratung Design Dokumentation KI Konzeption Optimierung Support Vertrieb Sprachen Ajax Basic C C# C++ Cobol Delphi ETL Fortran Java JavaScript Natural Perl PHP PL/I PL-SQL Python SAL Smalltalk SQL ABAP Atlas Clips Delta FOCUS HTML Nomad Pascal SPL Spring TAL XML Detaillierte Komponenten AM BI FS-BA MDM PDM PM BW CO FI LO PP Datenbanken Approach IBM Microsoft Object Store Oracle Progress Sybase DMS ISAM JDBC mySQL DC/Netzwerke ATM DDS Gateway HBCI Hub Internet Intranet OpenSSL SSL VPN Asynchronous CISCO Router DNS DSL Firewall Gateways HTTP RFC Router Samba Sockets Switches Finance Business Intelligence Excel Konsolidierung Management Projektleiter Reporting Testing Wertpapiere Einkauf CAD Systeme CATIA V5 sonstige Hardware Digital HP PC Scanner Siemens Spark Teradata Bus FileNet NeXT SUN Switching Tools, Methoden Docker Go Kubernetes Rational RUP
    [Show full text]
  • 2.5 AWS Lambda
    Bachelorarbeit Jules Fehr Serverlose Architektur: Function as a Service mit AWS Lambda am Beispiel einer Web-Anwendung für Fotografen Fakultät Technik und Informatik Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science Department Informatik Department of Computer Science Jules Fehr Serverlose Architektur: Function as a Service mit AWS Lambda am Beispiel einer Web-Anwendung für Fotografen Abschlussarbeit eingereicht im Rahmen der Bachelorprüfung im Studiengang Wirtschaftsinformatik am Department Informatik der Fakultät Technik und Informatik der Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg Betreuender Prüfer: Prof. Dr. Ulrike Steffens Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Stefan Sarstedt Abgegeben am 19.07.2018 Jules Fehr Thema der Arbeit Serverlose Architektur: Function as a Service mit AWS Lambda Beispiel einer Web-Anwendung für Fotografen Stichworte FaaS, Serverless, AWS Lambda, Web-Anwendung Kurzzusammenfassung Das Ziel dieser Bachelorarbeit ist die Konzeption und Entwicklung einer Function as a Service Web-Anwendung für Fotografen. In dieser Arbeit werden die Prinzipien von serverloser Architektur behandelt. Es wird eine Referenzarchitektur vorgestellt und es wird eine Anforderungsanalyse für die Anwendung erstellt. Basierend auf der Analyse und den Prinzipien der serverlosen Architektur wird die Umsetzung wichtiger Komponenten erläutert. Jules Fehr Title of the paper Serverless Architecture: Function as a Service with AWS Lambda on the example of a web application for photographers Keywords FaaS, Serverless, AWS Lambda, Web-application Abstract The goal of this bachelor thesis is the conception and development of a Function as a Service web-application for photographers. The principles of serverless architecture will be discussed. A reference architecture will be presented and a requirement analysis will be made. The implementation of important components will be made based on the analysis and the principles of serverless architecture.
    [Show full text]
  • Nanolambda: Implementing Functions As a Service at All Resource Scales for the Internet of Things
    NanoLambda: Implementing Functions as a Service at All Resource Scales for the Internet of Things. Gareth George, Fatih Bakir, Rich Wolski, and Chandra Krintz Computer Science Department Univ. of California, Santa Barbara Abstract—Internet of Things (IoT) devices are becoming in- decompose their applications into multiple functions, each re- creasingly prevalent in our environment, yet the process of sponsible for some short-lived piece of processing. A function programming these devices and processing the data they produce is typically a small, single-entry code package (50 megabytes remains difficult. Typically, data is processed on device, involving arduous work in low level languages, or data is moved to the or less) written in a high level language (e.g. Python, node.js, cloud, where abundant resources are available for Functions or Java). Thanks to their small size and self-contained design, as a Service (FaaS) or other handlers. FaaS is an emerging these functions are easily invoked and scaled automatically category of flexible computing services, where developers deploy by the FaaS platform in response to incoming events (data self-contained functions to be run in portable and secure con- arrival, messages, web requests, storage updates, etc.). Many tainerized environments; however, at the moment, these functions are limited to running in the cloud or in some cases at the “edge” functions, potentially belonging to different tenants, execute on of the network using resource rich, Linux-based systems. a single server, using Linux containers to provide secure iso- In this paper, we present NanoLambda, a portable platform lation and a consistent execution environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Gvisor Is a Project to Restrict the Number of Syscalls That the Kernel and User Space Need to Communicate
    SED 820 Transcript EPISODE 820 [INTRODUCTION] [0:00:00.3] JM: The Linux operating system includes user space and kernel space. In user space, the user can create and interact with a variety of applications directly. In kernel space, the Linux kernel provides a stable environment in which device drivers interact with hardware and manage low-level resources. A Linux container is a virtualized environment that runs within user space. To perform an operation, a process in a container in user space makes a syscall, which is a system call into kernel space. This allows the container to have access to resources like memory and disk. Kernel space must be kept secure to ensure the operating system’s integrity. Linux includes hundreds of syscalls. Each syscall represents an interface between the user space and the kernel space. Security vulnerabilities can emerge from this wide attack surface of different syscalls and most applications only need a small number of syscalls to provide their required functionality. gVisor is a project to restrict the number of syscalls that the kernel and user space need to communicate. gVisor is a runtime layer between the user space container and the kernel space. gVisor reduces the number of syscalls that can be made into kernel space. The security properties of gVisor make it an exciting project today, but it is the portability features of gVisor that hint at a huge future opportunity. By inserting an interpreter interface between containers and the Linux kernel, gVisor presents the container world with an opportunity to run on operating systems other than Linux.
    [Show full text]
  • Serverless Computing in Financial Services High Performance Computing—With More Speed, Accuracy and Flexibility Authors
    Serverless computing in financial services High performance computing—with more speed, accuracy and flexibility Authors Michael Behrendt is a Distinguished Engineer in Neil Cowit is the Worldwide Cloud Offering the IBM Cloud development organization. He is Manager for High Performance Computing at responsible for IBM’s technical strategy around IBM. HPC has been a significant part of Neil’s serverless & Function-as-a-Service. 20-plus-year career within the financial services technology sector. He has held leadership In that context, he’s also the chief architect for and individual contributor roles in Product the IBM serverless offering, IBM Cloud Functions. Management, Development, Sales and Marketing. Before that, he was the chief architect of the core platform of IBM Bluemix and was one of the initial founding members incubating it. Michael has been working on cloud computing for more than 13 years and has 35 patents. He is located in the IBM Research & Development Laboratory in Boeblingen, Germany. | 2 | Contents Authors 02 Introduction 04 What issues can serverless computing help address? 06 Technical perspective 07 IBM Cloud Functions: Implementing serverless computing 08 Benefits of IBM Cloud Functions 08 Conclusion 09 Glossary 10 | 3 | Introduction If Mrs. Wallis Simpson were alive today and Wouldn’t it be terrific if we only had to solve static involved in financial services, she may very well or deterministic models as opposed to stochastic have modified her famous quote from “You can or probabilistic financial models? Imagine being never be too rich or too thin.” to “You can never able to cover all the possible contingencies in have too much compute capacity.” proportion to their likelihood.
    [Show full text]
  • Surviving Software Dependencies
    practice DOI:10.1145/3347446 is additional code a programmer wants Article development led by queue.acm.org to call. Adding a dependency avoids repeating work: designing, testing, de- bugging, and maintaining a specific Software reuse is finally here unit of code. In this article, that unit of but comes with risks. code is referred to as a package; some systems use the terms library and mod- BY RUSS COX ule instead. Taking on externally written depen- dencies is not new. Most programmers have at one point in their careers had to go through the steps of manually Surviving installing a required library, such as C’s PCRE or zlib; C++’s Boost or Qt; or Java’s JodaTime or JUnit. These pack- ages contain high-quality, debugged Software code that required significant exper- tise to develop. For a program that needs the functionality provided by one of these packages, the tedious work of manually downloading, in- Dependencies stalling, and updating the package is easier than the work of redeveloping that functionality from scratch. The high fixed costs of reuse, however, mean manually reused packages tend to be big; a tiny package would be easier to reimplement. FOR DECADES, DISCUSSION of software reuse was more A dependency manager (a.k.a. pack- common than actual software reuse. Today, the situation age manager) automates the download- ing and installation of dependency is reversed: developers reuse software written by others packages. As dependency managers every day, in the form of software dependencies, and the make individual packages easier to download and install, the lower fixed situation goes mostly unexamined.
    [Show full text]
  • Firecracker: Lightweight Virtualization for Serverless Applications
    Firecracker: Lightweight Virtualization for Serverless Applications Alexandru Agache, Marc Brooker, Andreea Florescu, Alexandra Iordache, Anthony Liguori, Rolf Neugebauer, Phil Piwonka, and Diana-Maria Popa, Amazon Web Services https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi20/presentation/agache This paper is included in the Proceedings of the 17th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI ’20) February 25–27, 2020 • Santa Clara, CA, USA 978-1-939133-13-7 Open access to the Proceedings of the 17th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI ’20) is sponsored by Firecracker: Lightweight Virtualization for Serverless Applications Alexandru Agache Marc Brooker Andreea Florescu Amazon Web Services Amazon Web Services Amazon Web Services Alexandra Iordache Anthony Liguori Rolf Neugebauer Amazon Web Services Amazon Web Services Amazon Web Services Phil Piwonka Diana-Maria Popa Amazon Web Services Amazon Web Services Abstract vantage over traditional server provisioning processes: mul- titenancy allows servers to be shared across a large num- Serverless containers and functions are widely used for de- ber of workloads, and the ability to provision new func- ploying and managing software in the cloud. Their popularity tions and containers in milliseconds allows capacity to be is due to reduced cost of operations, improved utilization of switched between workloads quickly as demand changes. hardware, and faster scaling than traditional deployment meth- Serverless is also attracting the attention of the research com- ods. The economics and scale of serverless applications de- munity [21,26,27,44,47], including work on scaling out video mand that workloads from multiple customers run on the same encoding [13], linear algebra [20, 53] and parallel compila- hardware with minimal overhead, while preserving strong se- tion [12].
    [Show full text]
  • Serverless in the Wild: Characterizing and Optimizing the Serverless Workload at a Large Cloud Provider
    Serverless in the Wild: Characterizing and Optimizing the Serverless Workload at a Large Cloud Provider Mohammad Shahrad, Rodrigo Fonseca, Íñigo Goiri, Gohar Chaudhry, Paul Batum, Jason Cooke, Eduardo Laureano, Colby Tresness, Mark Russinovich, and Ricardo Bianchini July 15, 2020 What is Serverless? •Very attractive abstraction: • Pay for Use • Infinite elasticity from 0 (and back) • No worry about servers • Provisioning, Reserving, Configuring, patching, managing •Most popular offering: Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) • Bounded-time functions with no persistent state among invocations • Upload code, get an endpoint, and go For the rest of this talk, Serverless = Serverless FaaS What is Serverless? Bare Metal VMs (IaaS) Containers Functions (FaaS) Unit of Scale Server VM Application/Pod Function Provisioning Ops DevOps DevOps Cloud Provider Init Time Days ~1 min Few seconds Few seconds Scaling Buy new hardware Allocate new VMs 1 to many, auto 0 to many, auto Typical Lifetime Years Hours Minutes O(100ms) Payment Per allocation Per allocation Per allocation Per use State Anywhere Anywhere Anywhere Elsewhere Serverless “…more than 20 percent of global enterprises will have deployed serverless computing technologies by 2020.” Gartner, Dec 2018 Serverless Source: CNCF Cloud Native Interactive Landscape https://landscape.cncf.io/format=serverless Serverless December 2019 “… we predict that (…) serverless computing will grow to dominate the future of cloud computing.” So what are people doing with FaaS? • Interesting Explorations • MapReduce (pywren)
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of Cloud Application Architectures
    applied sciences Review A Brief History of Cloud Application Architectures Nane Kratzke ID Lübeck University of Applied Sciences, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 23562 Lübeck, Germany; [email protected] Received: 14 July 2018; Accepted: 27 July 2018; Published: 14 August 2018 Featured Application: This paper features system and software engineering use cases for large-scale (business) Cloud-native applications (e.g., Netflix, Twitter, Uber, Google Search). Such Cloud-native applications (CNA) provide web-scalability and independent deployability of their components and enable exponential user growth. Furthermore, migration and architecture transformation use cases of existing tiered and on-premise (business) applications are additionally of interest. Thus, questions of how existing and not cloud-ready applications are migratable into cloud environments are covered as well. Abstract: This paper presents a review of cloud application architectures and its evolution. It reports observations being made during a research project that tackled the problem to transfer cloud applications between different cloud infrastructures. As a side effect, we learned a lot about commonalities and differences from plenty of different cloud applications which might be of value for cloud software engineers and architects. Throughout the research project, we analyzed industrial cloud standards, performed systematic mapping studies of cloud-native application-related research papers, did action research activities in cloud engineering projects, modeled a cloud application reference model, and performed software and domain-specific language engineering activities. Two primary (and sometimes overlooked) trends can be identified. First, cloud computing and its related application architecture evolution can be seen as a steady process to optimize resource utilization in cloud computing.
    [Show full text]