Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Serverless computing

Serverless computing is a execution model in which providers dynamically manage the allocation, provisioning, and of compute resources, enabling developers to build and run applications and services without the need to manage underlying servers or . This approach abstracts away operational complexities such as server maintenance, , and elasticity, allowing developers to focus solely on writing code while the provider handles resource optimization and billing based on actual usage, typically measured in compute time, , and . Unlike traditional infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) or platform-as-a-service (PaaS) models, serverless is inherently event-driven, allocating resources only when triggered by specific events like requests or database changes, and automatically to zero during idle periods. The concept of serverless computing emerged in the early as an evolution from earlier paradigms like in mainframes (1960s), (1990s), and general (2000s), addressing the limitations of manual server provisioning and high operational costs in dynamic workloads. A pivotal milestone was the 2014 launch of , the first widely adopted (FaaS) platform, which popularized the term "serverless" despite the presence of servers managed entirely by the provider. Since then, major cloud providers like Google Cloud and have introduced comparable offerings, such as Cloud Functions and Azure Functions, fostering widespread adoption for , APIs, and event-driven architectures. By 2023, serverless had become a core component of modern cloud ecosystems, supporting diverse applications from web backends to pipelines. At its core, serverless computing encompasses two primary models: , where developers deploy discrete functions that execute in response to events, and , which provides managed backend services like databases, authentication, and storage via APIs. Functions are typically stateless, short-lived, and executed in isolated environments, with providers ensuring and through multi-tenancy . Key benefits include enhanced developer productivity by eliminating , cost efficiency through pay-per-use pricing that avoids charges for idle resources, and seamless to handle variable loads without over-provisioning. Notable use cases span real-time data processing, such as analyzing data in hours rather than weeks, and rapid . Despite its advantages, serverless computing faces challenges including cold-start latencies—delays in initializing functions for the first time—which can impact performance for latency-sensitive applications, as well as security concerns related to shared . and limitations in supporting long-running or stateful workloads also persist, prompting ongoing research into hybrid models and optimizations for emerging fields like and . As of 2025, serverless continues to evolve, with projections indicating its role in enabling more agile, efficient cloud-native development across industries.

Introduction

Definition and Core Concepts

Serverless computing is a cloud-native model in which cloud providers dynamically manage the allocation and provisioning of servers, enabling developers to build and deploy applications without handling underlying infrastructure tasks. In this paradigm, developers focus exclusively on writing code, while the provider assumes responsibility for operating systems, server maintenance, patching, and . This abstraction allows for the creation of event-driven applications that respond to triggers such as HTTP requests or database changes, without the need for persistent server instances. At its core, serverless computing relies on three primary abstractions: pay-per-use billing, automatic scaling, and the elimination of server provisioning and maintenance. Under the pay-per-use model, users are charged only for the compute resources—such as and —actually consumed during execution, with no costs incurred for idle periods. Automatic scaling ensures that resources expand or contract instantaneously based on demand, handling everything from zero to thousands of concurrent invocations seamlessly. By removing the need for developers to provision or maintain servers, this model shifts operational burdens to the cloud provider, fostering greater developer productivity and application agility. Serverless computing differs markedly from other cloud paradigms like (IaaS) and (PaaS). IaaS provides virtualized servers and storage that users must configure and manage, while PaaS offers a managed platform for running applications continuously but still requires oversight of runtime environments and scaling policies. In contrast, serverless extends this abstraction further by eliminating even the platform layer, executing code only without persistent . Importantly, the term "serverless" does not imply the absence of servers but rather the absence of server management by the developer; servers still exist and are operated entirely by the cloud provider behind the scenes. This nomenclature highlights the model's emphasis on invisibility of infrastructure, allowing developers to prioritize logic and business value over operational concerns.

History and Evolution

The origins of serverless computing are intertwined with the advent of modern cloud infrastructure, beginning with the launch of (AWS) in March 2006, which introduced scalable, on-demand computing resources and pioneered the shift away from traditional server management. This foundational development enabled subsequent abstractions in compute delivery, setting the stage for event-driven execution models that would define serverless paradigms. A pivotal occurred in November 2014 when AWS unveiled Amazon Lambda at its re:Invent conference, introducing the first widely adopted (FaaS) platform that allowed developers to execute code in response to events without provisioning servers. Lambda's pay-per-use model and seamless integration with other AWS services quickly demonstrated the viability of serverless for real-world applications, sparking industry interest in abstracted compute. The mid-2010s saw rapid proliferation as competitors followed suit. Microsoft announced the general availability of Azure Functions in November 2016, extending serverless capabilities to its ecosystem with support for multiple languages and triggers. Google Cloud Functions entered beta in March 2017, focusing on lightweight, event-driven functions integrated with Google services like Pub/Sub. Concurrently, open-source efforts emerged to democratize serverless beyond proprietary clouds; OpenFaaS, initiated in 2016, provided a framework for deploying functions on Kubernetes and other platforms, emphasizing portability. By 2018, the ecosystem matured further with Google's announcement of Knative, a Kubernetes-based project that standardized serverless workloads for container orchestration, facilitating easier deployment across environments. Key announcements at events like AWS re:Invent continued to drive innovation, including expansions such as in 2017, which brought serverless execution to content delivery networks for low-latency processing. Entering the , serverless computing evolved toward multi-cloud compatibility and deployments, enabled by tools like Knative for environments and growing support for distributed execution. Adoption transitioned from niche use in architectures to mainstream integration by 2023, with organizations across AWS, , and Google Cloud reporting 3-7% year-over-year growth in serverless workloads. As of 2025, serverless adoption has accelerated, particularly in enterprise workloads and integrations with and , with the global market projected to reach USD 52.13 billion by 2030 growing at a (CAGR) of 14.1% from 2025. In October 2025, Knative achieved graduated status within the (CNCF), underscoring its maturity for production use in serverless and event-driven applications.

Architecture and Execution Model

Function as a Service (FaaS)

(FaaS) represents the core compute paradigm within serverless computing, enabling developers to deploy and execute individual units of code, known as functions, in response to specific triggers without provisioning or managing underlying servers. In this model, developers upload code snippets that are invoked by events such as HTTP requests, database changes, or entries, with the cloud provider handling the provisioning of runtime environments on demand. This event-driven approach abstracts away concerns, allowing functions to scale automatically based on incoming requests. The mechanics of FaaS involve packaging application logic into discrete, stateless functions that are triggered asynchronously or synchronously. For instance, an HTTP-triggered function might process API calls, while a queue-triggered one handles background tasks from services like Amazon SQS. Upon invocation, the platform dynamically allocates a containerized environment tailored to the function's and dependencies, executing the code in before tearing it down to free resources. This on-demand provisioning ensures that functions only consume resources during active execution, typically lasting from milliseconds to a few minutes, promoting efficient utilization in variable workloads. The execution lifecycle of a FaaS function encompasses three primary phases: invocation, execution, and teardown. Invocation occurs when an event matches the function's configuration, queuing the request for ; the then initializes or reuses a warm instance if available. During execution, the function runs within allocated compute resources, with durations constrained to prevent indefinite resource holds— for example, up to 15 minutes in . Teardown follows completion, where the runtime environment is terminated or idled, releasing and CPU; this ephemerality ensures , requiring functions to avoid in-memory persistence. Concurrency models govern parallel executions, such as 's default limit of 1,000 concurrent executions per region across all functions, which can be adjusted via reserved or provisioned concurrency to manage throttling. Major cloud providers implement FaaS with tailored features to support diverse development needs. AWS Lambda, a pioneering service, supports languages including , , , and , with configurable memory from 128 MB to 10,240 MB and a maximum execution timeout of 15 minutes. Google Cloud Functions (2nd generation) accommodates , , Go, , , PHP, and .NET, offering up to 32 GiB of memory per function and timeouts of up to 60 minutes for both HTTP and event-driven invocations. Azure Functions provides support for C#, , , , , and , with memory limits up to 1.5 GB on the Consumption plan and execution timeouts extending to 10 minutes. These providers emphasize polyglot runtimes and adjustable resource allocations to optimize for short-lived, event-responsive workloads. To compose complex workflows from individual FaaS functions, orchestration tools like AWS Step Functions enable stateful coordination, defining sequences, parallels, or conditionals across invocations while handling retries and errors. This integration allows developers to build resilient, multi-step applications, such as order processing pipelines, by visually modeling state machines that invoke functions as needed.

Backend as a Service (BaaS) and Integration

(BaaS) refers to a model that provides fully managed backend infrastructure and services, allowing developers to build applications without writing or maintaining custom server-side code. In serverless computing, BaaS acts as a complementary layer to (FaaS) by offering pre-built, scalable services accessible via APIs, such as databases, storage, and user management tools. This approach enables developers to focus on frontend logic and application features while the provider handles scalability, security, and operational overhead. Prominent examples include Google Firebase, which integrates authentication and real-time databases, and (AWS) Cognito for . Key components of BaaS in serverless architectures include managed databases, mechanisms, and tools. Managed databases like provide storage with automatic scaling and , supporting key-value and data models without the need for or server provisioning. services, such as those using and JSON Web Tokens (JWT), are handled by platforms like AWS Cognito or , which manage user sign-up, sign-in, and through secure token issuance and validation. API gateways, exemplified by AWS API Gateway, facilitate the creation, deployment, and monitoring of RESTful or HTTP APIs, integrating seamlessly with other backend services to route requests and enforce policies like throttling and authorization. Integration patterns in BaaS often involve chaining FaaS functions with BaaS components through event triggers, enabling responsive and loosely coupled architectures. For instance, an function (FaaS) can be triggered by changes in a DynamoDB table (BaaS), processing updates and propagating them to other services like notification systems. Serverless APIs frequently leverage resolvers, as seen in AWS AppSync, where resolvers map GraphQL queries to backend data sources such as DynamoDB or Lambda functions, allowing efficient data fetching and real-time subscriptions without direct database connections from the client. Hybrid models combining FaaS and BaaS support full-stack serverless applications by orchestrating compute and data services in a unified . In these setups, FaaS handles dynamic logic while BaaS provides persistent and features, creating end-to-end applications like mobile backends or web services. A critical aspect is maintaining data consistency in distributed systems, where services like DynamoDB employ by default—ensuring replicas synchronize within one second or less after writes—though strongly consistent reads can be requested for scenarios requiring immediate accuracy at the cost of higher latency. This model balances availability and partition tolerance per the , with mechanisms like DynamoDB Streams aiding in event-driven consistency propagation across components.

Benefits and Operational Advantages

Scalability and Elasticity

Serverless computing inherently supports automatic through provisioning of execution environments, enabling functions to respond to varying volumes without manual intervention. In platforms like , occurs by creating additional execution environments—up to 1,000 per function every 10 seconds—based on incoming requests, allowing systems to handle bursts from zero to thousands of concurrent executions in seconds. This mechanism ensures that resources are allocated dynamically, with invoking code only when needed and out to meet until account-level concurrency limits are reached. Similarly, Google Cloud Functions automatically scales HTTP-triggered functions rapidly in response to traffic, while background functions adjust more gradually, supporting a default of 100 instances (configurable up to 1,000) for second-generation functions. Elasticity in serverless architectures is achieved through instant provisioning and de-provisioning of resources, where unused execution environments are terminated after periods of inactivity to optimize efficiency. For instance, reuses warm environments for subsequent invocations and employs governors, such as burst limits and gradual ramp-up rates, to prevent over-provisioning during sudden spikes while maintaining responsiveness. Provisioned concurrency in Lambda allows pre-warming of instances to minimize during predictable loads, and de-provisioning occurs seamlessly when demand drops, often scaling to zero instances. In Google Cloud Functions, elasticity is enhanced by configurable minimum and maximum instance settings, enabling scale-to-zero behavior for cost-effective idle periods and rapid expansion during active use. These features collectively reduce operational overhead by abstracting , allowing developers to focus on code rather than . One key advantage of serverless scalability is its ability to handle extreme traffic spikes with zero downtime, making it ideal for variable workloads like events. During Day 2022, AWS serverless components such as DynamoDB processed over 105 million requests per second, demonstrating seamless elasticity under peak global demand without infrastructure failures. Retailer leveraged to scale compute resources dynamically during COVID-19-induced traffic surges, equivalent to volumes, ensuring uninterrupted service for millions of users. This automatic horizontal scaling prevents bottlenecks by distributing load across ephemeral instances, providing even during unpredictable bursts that could overwhelm traditional setups. However, serverless platforms impose limits and require configurations to manage effectively. AWS Lambda enforces regional quotas, such as a default account concurrency of 1,000 executions, with function-level reserved concurrency allowing customization to throttle or prioritize specific functions and avoid the noisy neighbor problem. Users can request quota increases, but scaling rates are governed to scale by up to 1,000 concurrent executions every 10 seconds per function for safety. In Google Cloud Functions, first-generation background functions support up to 3,000 concurrent invocations by default, while second-generation functions scale based on configurable instances and per-instance concurrency, with regional project limits on total memory and CPU to prevent overuse. These configurable limits enable fine-tuned elasticity while safeguarding against resource exhaustion, though exceeding them may require quota adjustments via provider consoles.

Cost Optimization and Efficiency

Serverless computing employs a pay-per-use billing model, where users are charged based on the number of function invocations and the of execution, rather than provisioning fixed resources. For instance, in , pricing includes $0.20 per 1 million requests and $0.0000166667 per GB-second of compute time, with duration rounded up to the nearest and now encompassing initialization phases as of August 2025. This granular approach ensures costs align directly with actual resource consumption, eliminating charges for idle time. The model delivers significant efficiency gains, particularly for bursty or unpredictable workloads, by avoiding the expenses of maintaining always-on virtual machines (VMs). Studies indicate serverless architectures can reduce total costs by 38% to 57% compared to traditional server-based models, factoring in infrastructure, development, and maintenance. For sporadic tasks, this translates to substantial savings, as organizations pay only for active execution rather than over-provisioned capacity that remains underutilized in VM setups. To further optimize costs, developers can minimize function duration through efficient code practices, such as reducing dependencies and optimizing algorithms, which directly lowers GB-second charges. Additionally, provisioned concurrency pre-warms execution environments to mitigate the cost implications of cold starts, ensuring consistent without excessive invocation overhead, though it incurs a fixed for reserved . Total cost of ownership (TCO) in serverless benefits from diminished operational overhead, as providers handle infrastructure management, reducing the need for dedicated operations teams. However, TCO must account for potential fees from excessive invocations, such as in event-driven patterns that trigger functions more frequently than necessary, emphasizing the importance of architectural refinement to avoid unintended cost accumulation.

Challenges and Limitations

Performance Issues

One of the primary performance hurdles in serverless computing is the latency, which occurs when a requires provisioning a new execution , such as spinning up a or instance. This process involves downloading code packages, initializing the runtime, loading dependencies, and establishing network interfaces if applicable, leading to initial delays that can range from under 100 milliseconds to over 1 second in production workloads. Cold starts typically affect less than 1% of invocations in real-world deployments, but their impact is pronounced in -sensitive applications. Key factors exacerbating this include the choice of language runtime—interpreted languages like or initialize faster than compiled ones like due to reduced class loading overhead—and package size, where larger deployments (up to 250 MB unzipped) increase download and extraction times from object storage like Amazon S3. Serverless platforms impose strict execution limits to ensure resource efficiency and multi-tenancy, which can constrain throughput for compute-intensive or long-running tasks. For instance, enforces a maximum timeout of 900 seconds (15 minutes) per invocation, with configurable settings starting from 1 second, beyond which functions are terminated. Memory allocation ranges from 128 MB to 10,240 MB, and CPU power scales proportionally with memory—approximately 1.7 GHz equivalent per 1,769 MB—capping for memory-bound workloads and potentially throttling . These constraints limit the suitability of serverless for tasks exceeding these bounds, such as complex simulations, forcing developers to decompose applications or offload to other services. Network overhead further compounds performance issues in serverless architectures, particularly through inter-service communications via or message queues, which introduce additional in distributed workflows. In disaggregated environments, these calls—often over the public internet or virtual private clouds—contribute to elevated tail latency, defined as the 99th response time, due to variability in data transfer and queuing delays. Research on serverless clouds shows that such communication overhead can amplify tail latencies by factors related to bursty traffic and , making end-to-end predictability challenging for chained function executions. Monitoring distributed executions poses additional challenges, as serverless applications span multiple ephemeral functions and services, complicating the identification of performance bottlenecks. Tools like AWS X-Ray address this by providing end-to-end tracing, generating service maps, and analyzing request flows to pinpoint latency sources in , though enabling such adds minimal overhead to invocations. This visibility is essential for optimizing trace data across but requires careful configuration to avoid sampling biases in high-volume environments.

Security and Compliance Risks

In serverless computing, security operates under a shared responsibility model, where the cloud provider assumes responsibility for securing the underlying , including physical , host operating systems, networking, and layers, while customers manage the security of their application code, data classification, encryption, and (IAM) configurations. For example, in platforms like , the provider handles patching and configuration of the execution environment, but users must define IAM policies adhering to least-privilege principles to restrict function access to only necessary resources. Key risks include over-permissioned functions, where excessively broad roles—such as those allowing wildcard (*) actions—can enable lateral movement or if a function is compromised. Secrets management introduces vulnerabilities when credentials are hardcoded in code or exposed via environment variables, increasing the potential for unauthorized access; services like AWS Secrets Manager mitigate this by providing encrypted storage, automatic rotation, and fine-grained controls for retrieval. attacks further threaten serverless applications through compromised dependencies, with studies of public repositories revealing that up to 80% of components in platforms like Docker Hub contain over 100 outdated or vulnerable packages, such as those affected by critical CVEs in libraries like . Compliance challenges arise in multi-tenant serverless environments, where shared infrastructure heightens the need for data isolation to meet regulations like GDPR and HIPAA, which mandate strict controls on personal health information and data residency to prevent cross-tenant breaches. Auditing supports compliance through tools like AWS CloudTrail, which records calls and management events for operational , enabling analysis for regulatory adherence and incident response. Mitigations emphasize encryption of data at rest and in transit using provider-managed keys and protocols to protect sensitive information throughout its lifecycle. Integrating Web Application Firewalls (WAF) via gateways filters malicious inputs and enforces against abuse, while zero-trust architectures require continuous verification, , and isolated function permissions to minimize insider and threats.

Vendor Lock-in and Portability

Vendor lock-in in serverless computing arises primarily from the reliance on proprietary and services offered by cloud providers, which create dependencies that hinder migration to alternative platforms. For instance, integrates seamlessly with AWS-specific event sources like S3 notifications and Gateway triggers, while Functions uses distinct bindings for Blob and Hubs, necessitating code adaptations for cross-provider compatibility. Tooling differences further exacerbate this issue, as deployment configurations, runtime environments, and monitoring tools vary significantly between providers, often requiring reconfiguration of infrastructure-as-code scripts or pipelines. Additionally, data gravity—where accumulated data becomes tethered to a provider due to high egress fees—intensifies lock-in; for example, transferring 10 TB from AWS S3 incurs $891 in fees, compared to $239.76 for monthly storage, making portability economically prohibitive. Portability challenges in serverless environments stem from the need to rewrite triggers, integrations, and dependencies when switching providers, leading to substantial development effort and potential downtime. Empirical studies indicate that using native APIs results in higher refactoring demands; in one experiment involving migration from AWS to Google Cloud, native API adaptations required 24 lines of code changes per function, compared to just 10 with abstraction tools, highlighting up to 58% more effort without mitigation strategies. Surveys of serverless adopters reveal that 54% anticipate substantial refactoring for provider migrations, often involving rearchitecting event-driven workflows and state management to align with new platform semantics. These challenges not only increase migration costs but also introduce risks of incomplete portability, where certain workloads encounter "dead-ends" due to incompatible BaaS features. To address these issues, abstraction layers and open-source frameworks provide cloud-agnostic interfaces that decouple applications from provider-specific details, enabling easier multi-cloud deployments. The supports multiple providers including AWS, , and Google Cloud through unified configurations, allowing developers to package functions as portable artifacts and switch backends with minimal code changes. OpenFaaS further enhances portability by building functions as OCI-compliant container images, deployable across clusters on any cloud or on-premises without rewriting, while abstracting scaling and event triggers. Standards like OpenAPI facilitate API-level by defining consistent service contracts, reducing the need for provider-specific client adaptations. For , tools like enable declarative provisioning of serverless resources across clouds, using provider-agnostic modules to handle functions, gateways, and storage consistently, thus mitigating lock-in through reproducible multi-cloud architectures. These solutions collectively promote workload distribution and vendor independence, though they require upfront investment in abstraction design.

Design Principles and Best Practices

Event-Driven Architecture

Event-driven architecture forms a foundational principle in serverless computing, where compute functions are invoked reactively in response to events generated by diverse sources, such as message queues, data streams, or publish-subscribe messaging systems. This paradigm decouples application components by treating events as the primary mechanism for communication, enabling systems to scale dynamically without continuous polling or tight integration between services. Typically, an event-driven serverless architecture comprises event sources that emit notifications, routers that filter and direct these events based on predefined rules, and destinations where functions or other handlers process them. Key patterns in event-driven serverless designs include and , which govern how services interact asynchronously. In , services operate independently by listening to and reacting to shared events without a central , promoting and reducing single points of failure. This contrasts with , where a central engine sequences and manages event flows across services, providing explicit control for complex, linear processes. For handling distributed transactions in event-driven systems, the pattern sequences local transactions with compensating actions to maintain consistency in the absence of traditional guarantees, often implemented via state machines in serverless . The adoption of event-driven principles in serverless yields significant benefits, including between components, which allows independent evolution and deployment of functions. is enhanced through built-in mechanisms like message and automatic retries, mitigating failures in transient environments. Additionally, this approach supports elastic scalability by buffering events during spikes, enabling functions to process workloads without overprovisioning. To ensure interoperability across heterogeneous systems, event-driven serverless implementations often rely on standardized schemas, such as the CloudEvents specification introduced by the CNCF in 2018. CloudEvents defines a common structure for event metadata (e.g., source, type, time) and payload, facilitating portable event exchange between producers and consumers in cloud-native environments. This standard addresses fragmentation in event formats, promoting seamless integration in reactive systems while avoiding vendor-specific lock-in.

Stateless Design and Anti-Patterns

In serverless computing, functions operate under a strict stateless mandate, where each invocation is independent and does not retain memory of previous executions. This design principle ensures that the underlying platform can scale horizontally by distributing invocations across multiple instances without dependency on prior , enhancing and reducing coordination overhead. Any required , such as session data or application variables, must be explicitly stored and retrieved from external durable services, like for persistent or for caching. Violating this statelessness introduces several anti-patterns that undermine serverless benefits. One prevalent issue is storing session or temporary data in the 's in-memory environment, assuming persistence between calls; however, since functions may be reinitialized or terminated at any time, this leads to and inconsistent . Another anti-pattern involves designing long-running stateful processes within a single function, such as maintaining variables across extended operations, which often exceeds limits like the 15-minute timeout in or 10 minutes in Azure Functions (Consumption plan). The consequences of these anti-patterns are significant, including unpredictable where load distribution fails due to state dependencies, resulting in throttled invocations or cascading errors. Debugging and monitoring become arduous, as transient environments make reproducing issues difficult, and costs escalate from inefficient resource usage during failed retries. For example, in session-based applications like user interactions, in-memory loss can cause abrupt session drops, leading to poor and reliability issues. To adhere to stateless , best practices emphasize externalizing all . Developers should implement idempotency mechanisms, using unique keys (e.g., transaction IDs) to ensure operations produce the same result on retries without side effects, as recommended for functions. For caching needs, integrate services like through to store transient data durably and access it efficiently across invocations. Functions should remain granular and single-purpose, with stateful elements offloaded to managed services, enabling reliable event-driven triggers for state updates.

Applications and Use Cases

Web and Mobile Applications

Serverless computing has enabled the development of scalable applications by decoupling components, allowing developers to focus on code rather than management. In applications, backends are commonly built using services like Amazon Gateway integrated with to handle RESTful or endpoints without provisioning servers. Gateway acts as a fully managed service that processes incoming HTTP requests, routes them to functions for execution, and returns responses, supporting features such as throttling, caching, and authentication. This setup allows for automatic scaling based on traffic, where invokes functions in response to events, ensuring for dynamic content delivery. Static website hosting in serverless architectures leverages like for storing frontend assets, combined with content delivery networks such as for global distribution and low-latency access. S3 buckets configured for static website hosting serve HTML, CSS, , and images directly, while CloudFront caches content at edge locations to reduce load times and handle traffic spikes without backend servers. This approach is particularly suited for single-page applications (SPAs) or progressive web apps (PWAs), where compute-intensive logic is offloaded to edge functions or integrated APIs. For mobile applications, serverless backends provide essential services like user , push notifications, and data without managing servers. Amazon Cognito offers serverless user , , and management, integrating seamlessly with mobile SDKs to handle sign-up, sign-in, and for millions of users via JWT tokens. Push notifications are facilitated by services like (FCM), which delivers real-time messages to and devices at scale, triggered by serverless functions in response to events such as user actions or database changes. Offline patterns in serverless mobile apps use persistence, where local data is cached and synced bidirectionally with cloud databases like Realtime Database once connectivity is restored, ensuring resilient user experiences. For example, Cloud Functions can integrate with to handle custom backend logic for mobile apps, such as processing user events or integrating with other services. Real-world implementations demonstrate the effectiveness of serverless in web and mobile contexts. employs for serverless backend processes, such as processing millions of viewing requests and managing backups, enabling it to stream to over 300 million subscribers globally as of 2025 without provisioning capacity for peak loads. Similarly, Media Group uses functions to help editorial teams scale by templatizing and automating processes for its digital publishing platforms, serving over 80 million unique monthly readers. These examples highlight serverless , where architectures automatically handle surges—such as during viral events—scaling to millions of concurrent users by invoking functions on-demand and terminating them post-execution, thus optimizing resource utilization.

Data Processing and Analytics

Serverless computing facilitates efficient data processing and analytics by enabling event-driven (Extract, Transform, Load) pipelines that automatically scale to handle variable workloads without provisioning infrastructure. In such pipelines, data ingestion into can trigger functions to perform transformations, such as schema validation, , and partitioning, orchestrated by AWS Step Functions for workflow management and error handling. For instance, upon uploading files to S3, Lambda validates data types and moves valid files to a staging area, while AWS Glue subsequently converts them to optimized format with partitioning by date, enabling faster queries for analytics tools like Amazon Athena. This approach ensures cost-effectiveness, as resources are invoked only when events occur, and supports integration with data catalogs for metadata management. For comparison, Functions can be used in similar event-driven ETL pipelines, integrating with Azure Blob Storage and Data Factory for scalable data transformations. For stream analytics, serverless platforms support real-time ingestion and processing of continuous data flows, leveraging services like integrated with to compute aggregates in near-real-time. processes records from Kinesis streams synchronously, using tumbling windows—fixed, non-overlapping time intervals up to 15 minutes—to group data and maintain state across invocations, such as calculating total sales or metrics every 30 seconds from point-of-sale streams. This enables applications like fraud detection or live dashboards, where scales automatically to match stream throughput without managing servers. A prominent example is data , where AWS IoT Greengrass extends serverless capabilities to by allowing devices to filter, aggregate, and analyze sensor data locally before transmission to the cloud. Greengrass runs functions on edge devices to process and react to local events autonomously, reducing and costs—for instance, aggregating telemetry from industrial sensors and exporting summarized insights to AWS IoT Core for further . Similarly, serverless log benefits from Amazon CloudWatch Logs integrated with Amazon Athena, enabling SQL queries on log data without data movement; Athena's connector maps log groups to schemas and streams to tables, supporting analysis of access logs for insights like error rates or user patterns, often preprocessed by for efficiency. Key tools in this domain include AWS Glue, a fully managed, serverless ETL service that automates data discovery, preparation, and loading using , supporting over 70 data sources and formats. Glue crawlers catalog data in S3 or other stores, while its visual ETL interface and built-in transforms—like deduplication via FindMatches—streamline pipelines for , with jobs triggered by events or schedules to handle bursts scalably.

Comparisons and Ecosystem

Versus Traditional Cloud Models

Serverless computing represents a higher level of abstraction compared to Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) models, such as Amazon EC2, where developers must provision and manage virtual machines (VMs) explicitly. In IaaS, scaling typically requires manual configuration of auto-scaling groups or overprovisioning to anticipate demand, leading to potential idle resources and higher operational overhead. Serverless platforms, by contrast, fully abstract VMs, automatically scaling individual functions in response to events and scaling to zero during inactivity, thereby eliminating server management tasks and enabling fine-grained resource utilization. This shift allows developers to deploy code without concern for underlying infrastructure, though it sacrifices direct control over hardware and networking configurations available in IaaS. Relative to (PaaS) environments like , serverless reduces platform-specific configuration even further by managing provisioning entirely on the provider's side. PaaS offers automated scaling and deployment simplicity but often requires developers to handle application-level optimizations and incurs costs based on continuous instance , regardless of actual usage. Serverless introduces more granular billing—typically per of execution and per invocation—potentially lowering costs for sporadic workloads, while PaaS billing aligns more closely with provisioned capacity over hours or days. However, this comes with trade-offs in , as PaaS provides broader platform insights compared to the function-centric in serverless. Overall, serverless enhances developer productivity by shifting focus from infrastructure orchestration to , fostering faster iteration in event-driven systems. Yet, it offers less control than IaaS or PaaS, particularly for custom optimizations or stateful workloads, making it ideal for decomposed into stateless functions but less suitable for tightly coupled monolithic architectures without decomposition. Migration paths from traditional models often employ the Strangler pattern, incrementally refactoring VMs or monoliths by routing subsets of functionality to new serverless functions, allowing gradual replacement while maintaining system availability. This approach minimizes disruption but requires careful identification of modular components to avoid entanglement with legacy dependencies.

Integration with High-Performance Computing

Serverless computing encounters significant challenges when adapting to (HPC) workloads, primarily due to execution time limits—such as the 15-minute maximum on —that conflict with the extended durations of HPC simulations, often lasting hours or days. These constraints hinder direct deployment of compute-intensive tasks like or climate modeling, leading to fragmented workflows and potential data transfer overheads. To mitigate this, platforms like AWS Batch offer job queuing and multi-node , allowing serverless orchestration of long-running HPC jobs without managing underlying infrastructure. Hybrid models bridge these gaps by combining function-as-a-service (FaaS) with container-based systems, such as integrating with for GPU-accelerated tasks or using Knative on to deploy serverless functions alongside HPC clusters. For example, the rFaaS framework enables software resource disaggregation on supercomputers, co-locating short-lived serverless functions with batch-managed jobs to utilize idle CPU cores, memory, and GPUs via high-performance interconnects like RDMA, achieving up to 53% higher system utilization with minimal overhead (less than 5% for GPU sharing). Practical use cases demonstrate these integrations' viability, such as genomics simulations where processes protein sequence alignments using the Striped Smith-Waterman algorithm, partitioning tasks across hundreds of functions to deliver a 250x speedup over single-machine execution at under $1 total cost. Similarly, serverless supports bursty AI training workloads by elastically provisioning GPUs for intermittent high-demand phases, as seen in hybrid setups with for distributed model fine-tuning. Advancements in the have further propelled serverless HPC through specialized frameworks, including Wukong, which optimizes on platforms like via decentralized scheduling and data locality enhancements, accelerating jobs up to 68 times while reducing network I/O by orders of magnitude. Other tools, such as the ORNL framework for workflow adaptation, enable seamless migration of traditional HPC benchmarks to serverless environments, cutting CPU usage by 78% and by 74% without degradation in scientific simulations.

Future Directions

One prominent emerging trend in serverless computing is the extension of serverless paradigms to edge environments, enabling deployment on devices and resource-constrained hardware for low-latency processing. AWS IoT Greengrass exemplifies this shift by supporting the execution of functions directly on edge devices, allowing local event-driven responses without constant cloud connectivity. In 2024, enhancements such as the introduction of AWS IoT Greengrass Nucleus Lite provided a lightweight, open-source runtime optimized for devices like smart home hubs and edge systems, reducing resource overhead and facilitating broader adoption. These developments address challenges like intermittent connectivity in remote or mobile scenarios, promoting hybrid cloud-edge architectures. Integration of and (AI/ML) workflows represents another key innovation, particularly through serverless capabilities that eliminate infrastructure management for model deployment. Serverless , announced in preview at AWS re:Invent 2021 and generally available in 2022, allows users to serve ML models with automatic scaling based on traffic, handling variable workloads without provisioning servers. This facilitates efficient in applications like recommendation systems or . Complementing this, serverless AutoML workflows are gaining traction, automating model selection, hyperparameter tuning, and deployment in event-driven pipelines; for instance, platforms like Google Cloud's Vertex AI integrate serverless execution to streamline end-to-end ML operations without dedicated compute resources. The rise of multi-cloud and hybrid serverless environments is driven by portable runtimes like (Wasm), which enable code execution across diverse infrastructures with minimal . WasmEdge, launched around 2020 as a lightweight, high-performance Wasm runtime, supports serverless functions in cloud-native, edge, and decentralized settings, offering up to 100 times faster startup than traditional containers and compatibility with ecosystems. Its extensibility allows seamless migration between providers, such as deploying functions from to Azure Functions, fostering greater interoperability in hybrid setups. Evolving standards are enhancing serverless interoperability, with specifications like CloudEvents providing a unified format for event data across platforms. The CloudEvents 1.0 specification, released in October 2019 under the (CNCF), defines common attributes for events—such as source, type, and time—enabling consistent declaration and delivery in serverless systems regardless of the underlying service. Adopted by major providers including AWS, , and Google Cloud, it supports subsequent extensions like version 1.1, further improving event routing and integration in distributed architectures.

Sustainability and Broader Impacts

Serverless computing's pay-per-use model enhances by eliminating idle , particularly for bursty or intermittent workloads where traditional virtual machines (VMs) remain active unnecessarily. Studies indicate that this approach can reduce by up to 70% compared to VM-based systems, with similar reductions in carbon emissions for event-driven applications. For instance, AWS reports up to 70% lower carbon footprints for serverless functions in suitable scenarios, while has observed a tenfold decrease in electric footprint through consumption-based utilization. These gains stem from fine-grained , allowing functions to scale precisely to demand and avoid the overhead of persistent servers. Beyond environmental benefits, serverless computing democratizes access to scalable , enabling startups to innovate without substantial upfront investments in hardware or expertise. By abstracting management, it lowers barriers for small teams, fostering and deployment that were previously feasible only for large enterprises. This shift also transforms roles, reducing the need for deep knowledge as providers handle provisioning, , and , allowing developers to focus on application logic and business value. However, challenges persist, including rebound effects where the ease of encourages higher overall usage, potentially offsetting efficiency gains and increasing total cloud energy demands. Additionally, the rapid pace of provider updates and hardware refreshes in serverless ecosystems can contribute to electronic waste (e-waste) from obsolete equipment, exacerbating the environmental footprint of cloud infrastructure. To address these, tools like the AWS Customer Tool, launched in 2022, provide metrics for estimating emissions from serverless workloads, including historical data from January 2022 onward, to help users optimize and track . In October 2025, AWS updated the tool to include Scope 3 emissions data, providing fuller visibility into the lifecycle carbon impact of serverless usage.

References

  1. [1]
    What is Serverless Computing? - Amazon AWS
    Serverless computing is an application development model where you can build and deploy applications on third-party managed server infrastructure.Why is serverless computing... · What are the use cases of...
  2. [2]
    Serverless Computing - Communications of the ACM
    Sep 1, 2023 · Serverless computing is commonly understood as an approach to developing and running cloud applications without requiring server management. The ...
  3. [3]
    What is serverless computing | Google Cloud
    no server management needed. Learn how it works, benefits, examples, and use cases.
  4. [4]
    What is platform as a service (PaaS)? - Microsoft Azure
    PaaS and serverless computing are not the same. PaaS provides a platform with managed infrastructure where applications run continuously. With the serverless ...
  5. [5]
    What is serverless? - Red Hat
    Mar 3, 2025 · The term “serverless” doesn't mean there are no servers. It means ... Serverless computing and serverless architecture are often used ...
  6. [6]
    What are the different types of cloud computing?
    Types of cloud services: IaaS vs. PaaS vs. SaaS vs. serverless models · Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). IaaS delivers on-demand infrastructure resources, ...
  7. [7]
    Our Origins - Amazon AWS
    we launched Amazon Web Services in the spring of 2006, to rethink IT infrastructure completely so that anyone—even a kid in a college dorm room—could access the ...
  8. [8]
    Overview of Amazon Web Services - AWS Documentation
    Aug 27, 2024 · In 2006, Amazon Web Services (AWS) began offering IT infrastructure services to businesses as web services—now commonly known as cloud computing ...
  9. [9]
    Introducing AWS Lambda
    Nov 13, 2014 · AWS Lambda is a compute service that runs your code in response to events and automatically manages the compute resources for you, making it ...
  10. [10]
    AWS Lambda turns ten – looking back and looking ahead
    Nov 18, 2024 · 2014 – The preview launch of AWS Lambda ahead of AWS re:Invent 2014 with support for Node.js and the ability to respond to event triggers from ...
  11. [11]
    Announcing general availability of Azure Functions
    Nov 15, 2016 · Released in preview in March 2016, we're excited to announce the general availability of Azure Functions today. Functions supports the ...Integrated Tooling Support · Bind To Services · Our Customers
  12. [12]
    Announcing Cloud Functions in beta on Google Cloud Platform
    Mar 14, 2017 · Google Cloud Functions: A serverless environment to build and connect cloud services. March 14, 2017 ...
  13. [13]
    OpenFaaS: Introduction
    The core of OpenFaaS is an independent open-source project originally created by Alex Ellis in 2016. It is now being built and shaped by a growing community of ...Deployment overview · Community · OpenFaaS CE · GatewayMissing: date | Show results with:date
  14. [14]
    Lambda@Edge – Preview | AWS News Blog
    Dec 1, 2016 · We are launching a limited preview of Lambda@Edge today and are taking applications now. If you have a relevant use case and are ready to try ...
  15. [15]
    Cloud Native Computing Foundation Announces Knative's Graduation
    Oct 8, 2025 · SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. · Knative was created in 2018 at Google, with early contributions from partners such as IBM, Red Hat, VMware, and SAP.Missing: date | Show results with:date
  16. [16]
    The State of Serverless | Datadog
    Serverless adoption for organizations running in Azure and Google Cloud grew by 6 and 7 percent, respectively, with AWS seeing a 3 percent growth rate.
  17. [17]
    What Is Function as a Service (FaaS)? - IBM
    FaaS is a cloud-computing service that allows customers to run code in response to events, without managing the complex infrastructure.
  18. [18]
    Serverless vs Function-as-a-Service (FaaS): What's The Difference?
    Aug 6, 2021 · FaaS provides an event-driven computing architecture where functions are triggered by a specific event such as message queues, HTTP requests, ...
  19. [19]
    Serverless Computing and FaaS Model - The Next Stage in Cloud ...
    Jul 15, 2025 · So, let's get into the FaaS model. It is a Function as a Service model that allows the developers to develop, run, and manage applications ...
  20. [20]
    Test Automation for Serverless Architectures (FaaS)
    Jul 30, 2025 · Short-Lived Execution and Ephemerality​​ FaaS instances are ephemeral; they are spun up to handle an incoming event and may be torn down shortly ...
  21. [21]
    Life-cycle state diagram of a function instance. - ResearchGate
    Function instances in a FaaS platform can be in five different states, as shown in Figure 2: Cold-start, Warm-start, Busy, Idle, and Terminated.Missing: teardown | Show results with:teardown
  22. [22]
    Lambda quotas - AWS Documentation
    For example, API Gateway has a default throttle limit of 10,000 requests per second, whereas Lambda has a default concurrency limit of 1,000. Due to this ...
  23. [23]
    Understanding Lambda function scaling - AWS Documentation
    By default, Lambda provides your account with a total concurrency limit of 1,000 concurrent executions across all functions in an AWS Region.Provisioned Concurrency · Monitoring concurrency · Lambda scaling behavior
  24. [24]
    Lambda runtimes - AWS Documentation
    The following list shows the target launch month for upcoming Lambda runtimes. ... When a runtime approaches its deprecation date, Lambda sends you an email ...Building with Node.js · Runtime version updates · OS-only runtime
  25. [25]
    Quotas | Cloud Run functions - Google Cloud Documentation
    The following networking limits apply to Cloud Run functions (1st gen): Outbound connections per second per instance: 500 (cannot be increased) Outbound DNS ...
  26. [26]
    Cloud Run functions runtimes | Google Cloud Documentation
    There are multiple programming languages available: Node. js, Python, Go, Java, Ruby, PHP, and . NET. See Cloud Run functions overview to learn more.
  27. [27]
    Supported Languages in Azure Functions | Microsoft Learn
    .NET 6 was previously supported by the isolated worker model but reached the end of official support on November 12, 2024. .NET 7 was previously supported ...Languages By Runtime Version · Language Support Details · Language Major Version...
  28. [28]
    Azure Functions scale and hosting | Microsoft Learn
    Feb 2, 2025 · There's currently a limit of 5,000 function apps in a given subscription. Flex Consumption plan instance sizes are currently defined as 512 MB, ...Azure Container Apps · Functions best practices · Flex Consumption plan
  29. [29]
    Serverless Workflow Orchestration – AWS Step Functions
    AWS Step Functions lets you orchestrate multiple AWS services into serverless workflows so that you can build and update applications quickly.FAQs · Amazon Web Services · Pricing · Use Cases
  30. [30]
    Integrating services with Step Functions - AWS Documentation
    Learn how to integrate AWS services and call HTTPS APIs with Step Functions. With service integrations, your workflows can coordinate resources and ...
  31. [31]
    What is BaaS? | Backend-as-a-Service vs. serverless | Cloudflare
    Backend-as-a-Service allows developers to focus on their apps' frontend. Learn about the similarities and differences between BaaS and serverless computing.
  32. [32]
    Resolvers - AWS AppSync GraphQL
    A resolver is code that handles how field data is resolved when a request is made to the service, attached to specific fields in the schema.
  33. [33]
    [2209.09367] Supporting Multi-Cloud in Serverless Computing - arXiv
    Sep 19, 2022 · Serverless computing is a widely adopted cloud execution model composed of Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) and Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS) ...
  34. [34]
    DynamoDB read consistency - AWS Documentation
    DynamoDB provides read-committed isolation and ensures that read operations always return committed values for an item.
  35. [35]
    Build scalable, event-driven architectures with Amazon DynamoDB ...
    Nov 12, 2024 · The 1:1:1 relationship between partitions, shards, and Lambda instances helps maintain data consistency and makes sure changes are processed in ...
  36. [36]
    Lambda scaling behavior - AWS Documentation
    Lambda limits how fast your functions can scale. This concurrency scaling rate is the maximum rate at which functions in your account can scale in response to ...
  37. [37]
    Quotas  |  Cloud Run functions  |  Google Cloud
    ### Summary of Scaling, Max Instances, Concurrency, and Elasticity Features for Cloud Functions
  38. [38]
  39. [39]
    Survey on serverless computing
    Jul 12, 2021 · In this systematic survey, 275 research papers that examined serverless computing from well-known literature databases were extensively reviewed to extract ...
  40. [40]
    How to plan for peak demand on an AWS serverless digital ...
    Nov 2, 2022 · Here are four key steps that many of our retail customers follow who run their serverless ecommerce websites through high-volume events.
  41. [41]
  42. [42]
    AWS Lambda Pricing
    The monthly ephemeral storage price is $0.0000000309 for every GB-second and Lambda provides 512 MB of storage at no additional cost. Total compute (seconds) = ...
  43. [43]
    Cost optimization pillar - Serverless Applications Lens
    The cost optimization pillar includes the continual process of refinement and improvement of a system over its entire lifecycle.
  44. [44]
    [PDF] Comparing Serverless and Server-based Technologies
    Serverless technologies deliver lower TCO (38-57%) than server-based models. TCO includes infrastructure, development, and maintenance costs.
  45. [45]
    [PDF] Analysis of cost-efficiency of serverless approaches - arXiv
    Jun 6, 2025 · This paper surveys serverless cost-effectiveness, finding serverless solutions are generally more cost-effective than fixed server setups, with ...
  46. [46]
    Configuring provisioned concurrency for a function - AWS Lambda
    Provisioned concurrency is useful for reducing cold start latencies for functions and designed to make functions available with double-digit millisecond ...
  47. [47]
    [PDF] Determining the total cost of ownership: comparing serverless and ...
    The serverless TCO framework includes infrastructure, development, and maintenance costs, which are compared to server-based compute.
  48. [48]
    Understanding techniques to reduce AWS Lambda costs in ...
    Apr 20, 2023 · Deloitte research on serverless TCO with Fortune 100 clients across industries show that serverless applications can offer up to 57% cost ...
  49. [49]
    Operating Lambda: Performance optimization – Part 1 - Amazon AWS
    Apr 26, 2021 · According to an analysis of production Lambda workloads, cold starts typically occur in under 1% of invocations. The duration of a cold start ...
  50. [50]
    Understanding and Remediating Cold Starts: An AWS Lambda ...
    Aug 7, 2025 · However, larger packages can impact cold start latency due to factors such as increased S3 download time, ZIP extraction overhead, layer ...
  51. [51]
    Troubleshoot configuration issues in Lambda - AWS Documentation
    Timeouts for Lambda functions can be set between 1 and 900 seconds (15 minutes). By default, the Lambda console sets this to 3 seconds. The timeout value is a ...
  52. [52]
    Configure Lambda function memory - AWS Documentation
    Lambda memory can be configured between 128MB and 10,240MB. You can configure it via the console, AWS CLI, or AWS SAM. The default is 128MB.When to increase memory · Using the AWS CLI · Using AWS SAM
  53. [53]
    [PDF] Analyzing Tail Latency in Serverless Clouds with STeLLAR
    As with other cloud services, serverless deployments require responsiveness and performance predictability manifested through low average and tail latencies.
  54. [54]
    Analyzing Tail Latency in Serverless Clouds with STeLLAR
    This long tail latency is primarily because of disaggregation mechanism that increases the network communication overhead. Our analyses about tail latency of ...
  55. [55]
    Distributed Tracing System – AWS X-Ray – Amazon Web Services
    AWS X-Ray helps you debug and analyze your microservices applications with request tracing so you can find the root cause of issues and performance ...FAQs · Pricing · Features · Documentation
  56. [56]
    Shared Responsibility Model - Amazon Web Services (AWS)
    Security and Compliance is a shared responsibility between AWS and the customer. This shared model can help relieve the customer's operational burden.
  57. [57]
    Serverless FaaS Security - OWASP Cheat Sheet Series
    Key Risks¶ · Over-permissioned functions (broad IAM roles, * policies). · Unvalidated event inputs (API Gateway, S3, Pub/Sub, IoT). · Cold start data leakage ( ...
  58. [58]
    Cloud Password Management, Credential Storage - AWS Secrets Manager - AWS
    ### Summary: AWS Secrets Manager for Serverless Secrets Management
  59. [59]
    [PDF] The Hidden Dangers of Public Serverless Repositories - arXiv
    Oct 20, 2025 · Our analysis reveals systemic vulnerabilities including outdated software packages, misuse of sensitive parameters, exploitable deployment ...
  60. [60]
    security and compliance considerations in serverless data engineering
    May 21, 2025 · Data governance compliance standards including GDPR and HIPAA with additional local regulations create additional difficulties for ...
  61. [61]
    Compliance validation for AWS CloudTrail
    What Is AWS CloudTrail? AWS CloudTrail records events for operational auditing, governance, compliance. Provides event history, Lake data stores, trails.
  62. [62]
    Serverless Security: Risks and Best Practices - Sysdig
    In this guide, we will discuss serverless security, the risks associated, and the best practices for mitigating such challenges.
  63. [63]
    Mitigating attacks in serverless environments - Imperva
    Jun 30, 2021 · Deny by default. With the increase in supply chain attacks, it's important to enforce zero trust, in and outside of the network. One key ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Addressing Serverless Computing Vendor Lock-In through Cloud ...
    Vendor lock-in problems arise broadly for cloud computing code migration when developers are required to adapt software to use equivalent supporting services ...
  65. [65]
    [PDF] Supporting Multi-Cloud in Serverless Computing - arXiv
    Abstract—Serverless computing is a widely adopted cloud execution model composed of Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) and. Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS) offerings.
  66. [66]
    [PDF] Serverless computing: A paradigm shift for scalable microservices
    concerns about platform dependency, with 54% reporting that migration between cloud providers would require substantial refactoring efforts. The analysis ...
  67. [67]
    Home | OpenFaaS - Serverless Functions Made Simple
    Our templates follow best practices meaning you can write and deploy a new function to production within a few minutes, knowing it will scale to meet demand.OpenFaaS Store · Blog · Pricing · ProductsMissing: date | Show results with:date
  68. [68]
    Terraform in a Serverless World - HashiCorp
    Learn best practices across providers and provisioners to handle Lambda packaging, state management, and consistency while deploying with Terraform.
  69. [69]
    Event-driven architectures - Serverless Applications Lens
    Reference architecture​​ Every event-driven architecture consists of three main parts: Event sources. Event routers. Event destinations.
  70. [70]
    Choreography pattern - Azure Architecture Center | Microsoft Learn
    The choreography pattern decentralizes workflow logic, delegating transaction handling among services, minimizing dependency on a central orchestrator.
  71. [71]
    Implement the serverless saga pattern by using AWS Step Functions
    The saga pattern is a failure management pattern that helps establish consistency in distributed applications and coordinates transactions between multiple ...
  72. [72]
    Event-Driven Architecture Style - Microsoft Learn
    Aug 14, 2025 · You can use workflow patterns like Choreography and Saga Orchestration to reliably manage message flows across various services. Error ...
  73. [73]
    CloudEvents |
    CloudEvents is a specification for describing event data in a common way. CloudEvents seeks to dramatically simplify event declaration and delivery.
  74. [74]
    Converting stateful application to stateless using AWS services
    Nov 17, 2023 · In this blog, we outline the process and benefits of converting from a stateful to stateless architecture.
  75. [75]
    Statelessness - Fermyon
    Any state information must be stored somewhere else. Therefore, serverless apps are stateless. Statelessness is considered a good practice in general, and ...
  76. [76]
    Azure Functions best practices | Microsoft Learn
    May 13, 2025 · This article details some best practices for designing and deploying efficient function apps that remain healthy and perform well in a cloud-based environment.Choose The Correct Hosting... · Configure Storage Correctly · Consider Concurrency
  77. [77]
    Operating Lambda: Anti-patterns in event-driven architectures – Part 3
    Jan 25, 2021 · This post discusses common anti-patterns in event-driven architectures using Lambda. I show some of the issues when using monolithic Lambda functions or custom ...
  78. [78]
    Issues to Avoid When Implementing Serverless Architecture with ...
    May 27, 2021 · In this post, I highlight eight common anti-patterns I've seen and provide some recommendations to avoid them to ensure that your system is performing at its ...
  79. [79]
    Anti-patterns in Lambda-based applications - Serverless Land
    As with all patterns and anti-patterns in technology, these are not rules. This section provides general guidance for average use-cases and is not prescriptive.
  80. [80]
    Best practices for working with AWS Lambda functions
    Write idempotent code. Writing idempotent code for your functions ensures that duplicate events are handled the same way. Your code should properly validate ...
  81. [81]
    Handling Lambda functions idempotency with AWS ... - Amazon AWS
    Apr 20, 2022 · This post shows how you can use Lambda Powertools to make Lambda functions idempotent and ensure that critical transactions are handled only once.
  82. [82]
    Amazon API Gateway - AWS Documentation
    To enable serverless applications, API Gateway supports streamlined proxy integrations with AWS Lambda and HTTP endpoints. How to get started with Amazon API ...
  83. [83]
    Invoking a Lambda function using an Amazon API Gateway endpoint
    You can create a web API with an HTTP endpoint for your Lambda function by using Amazon API Gateway. API Gateway provides tools for creating and documenting ...Lambda proxy integrations · REST APIs · Tutorial · Select a method to invoke your...Missing: computing | Show results with:computing
  84. [84]
    Tutorial: Configuring a static website on Amazon S3
    Amazon CloudFront provides the capabilities required to set up a secure static website. Amazon S3 static websites support only HTTP endpoints. Amazon CloudFront ...
  85. [85]
    Amazon S3 + Amazon CloudFront: A Match Made in the Cloud
    Jun 27, 2018 · In this blog post, you'll learn how to use Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3) and Amazon CloudFront to store, secure, and deliver your static content at scale.<|separator|>
  86. [86]
    Enabling Offline Capabilities on Android | Firebase Realtime Database
    By enabling persistence, any data that the Firebase Realtime Database client would sync while online persists to disk and is available offline, even when the ...Querying Data Offline · Managing Presence · Handling LatencyMissing: Cognito | Show results with:Cognito
  87. [87]
    Netflix Case Study - Amazon AWS
    Netflix uses AWS for quick server deployment, global streaming, delivering billions of hours of content, and running its analytics platform.
  88. [88]
    How Bustle Leverages AWS Lambda to Help Editorial Teams Scale
    Sep 9, 2019 · Bustle Media Group, a New York City-based company with eight brands under its umbrella, leverages AWS services to efficiently deploy content ...Missing: personalization case study
  89. [89]
    Orchestrate an ETL pipeline with validation, transformation, and ...
    Create a serverless extract, transform, and load (ETL) pipeline that transforms, partitions, and compresses datasets for performance and cost optimization.Summary · Architecture · Tools · Epics
  90. [90]
    Using AWS Lambda for streaming analytics | AWS Compute Blog
    AWS Lambda now supports streaming analytics calculations for Amazon Kinesis and Amazon DynamoDB. This allows developers to calculate aggregates in near-real ...
  91. [91]
    Using Lambda to process records from Amazon Kinesis Data Streams
    Lambda reads records from the data stream and invokes your function synchronously with an event that contains stream records.
  92. [92]
    AWS IoT Greengrass - AWS Documentation
    AWS IoT Greengrass enables your devices to collect and analyze data closer to where that data is generated, react autonomously to local events, and communicate ...Choosing your AWS IoT... · Greengrass feature compatibility · How It WorksMissing: serverless | Show results with:serverless
  93. [93]
    Amazon Athena CloudWatch connector
    The Amazon Athena CloudWatch connector enables Amazon Athena to communicate with CloudWatch so that you can query your log data with SQL.Parameters · Databases and tables · Required Permissions · Passthrough queries
  94. [94]
    Build a Serverless Architecture to Analyze Amazon CloudFront ...
    May 26, 2017 · This serverless architecture uses Amazon Athena to analyze large volumes of CloudFront access logs (on the scale of terabytes per day), and Amazon Kinesis ...
  95. [95]
    What is AWS Glue? - AWS Glue - AWS Documentation
    AWS Glue is a serverless data integration service that makes it easy for analytics users to discover, prepare, move, and integrate data from multiple sources.
  96. [96]
    Serverless Computing: A Survey of Opportunities, Challenges, and ...
    The aim of the serverless services is threefold: (1) relieve users of cloud services from dealing with the infrastructures or the platforms, (2) convert the ...
  97. [97]
    Chipping Away at the Monolith: Applying MVPs and MVAs to Legacy ...
    Aug 19, 2022 · Microservices play well here as well as serverless functions in ... For example, using the "strangler pattern" is appropriate for migrating ...
  98. [98]
    [PDF] Enabling HPC Scientific Workflows for Serverless - OSTI
    Jul 12, 2024 · Our approach includes adapting the Wf-. Commons framework to generate serverless-compatible HPC workflow benchmarks and developing a new ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s<|separator|>
  99. [99]
    AWS Batch Features
    Support for tightly-coupled HPC workloads. AWS Batch supports multi-node parallel jobs, so you can run single jobs that span multiple EC2 instances. With ...Why Aws Batch? · Job Definitions · Integrations
  100. [100]
    Serverless Computing for Dynamic HPC Workflows
    The results highlight the benefits of combining Knative with. Pegasus for large-scale scientific computing, enhancing both performance and resource utilization.
  101. [101]
  102. [102]
    (PDF) Serverless computing provides on-demand high performance ...
    Serverless computing provides on-demand high performance computing for biomedical research ... integration and analysis, including data exploration and ...
  103. [103]
    (PDF) Serverless GPU Execution Models for High - ResearchGate
    May 22, 2025 · This research explores serverless GPU execution models tailored for HPC applications in hybrid cloud environments, analyzing their architectural frameworks.
  104. [104]
    Enabling HPC Scientific Workflows for Serverless... | ORNL
    Nov 1, 2024 · In this paper, we propose a framework to enable HPC scientific workflows on serverless. Our approach integrates a widely used traditional HPC workflow ...
  105. [105]
    AWS IoT Greengrass Features
    ### Summary of AWS Greengrass Support for Serverless Computing at the Edge
  106. [106]
    What's new in AWS IoT Greengrass Version 2
    This section contains all of the AWS IoT Greengrass V2 release notes, latest first, and includes major feature changes and significant bug fixes.Missing: serverless enhancements
  107. [107]
    Amazon SageMaker Serverless Inference is now generally available
    Apr 21, 2022 · With SageMaker Serverless Inference, you can quickly deploy machine learning (ML) models for inference without having to configure or manage the ...
  108. [108]
    [PDF] The Rise of Serverless AI: Transforming Machine Learning ...
    Apr 14, 2025 · The integration of AI/ML workflows with serverless architecture has revolutionized model serving capabilities. Performance analysis of Google ...
  109. [109]
    WasmEdge
    WasmEdge is a lightweight, high-performance, and extensible WebAssembly runtime for cloud native, edge, and decentralized applications.WasmEdge Developer Guides · Install and uninstall WasmEdge
  110. [110]
    WasmEdge Runtime | CNCF
    WasmEdge is a lightweight, high-performance, and extensible WebAssembly runtime for cloud native, edge, and decentralized applications.
  111. [111]
    Serverless specification CloudEvents reaches Version 1.0 | CNCF
    Oct 28, 2019 · In reaching v1.0 and moving to Incubation, the spec defines the common attributes of an event that facilitate interoperability, as well as how ...