Serverless architecture is a cloud computing execution architecture in which the applications and services are run without having to manage infrastructure. A serverless application runs in stateless compute containers that are event-driven, ephemeral (lasting only one invocation), and controlled entirely by the cloud provider.

Isn’t it the ideal framework for that project you’ve been planning for a long time? Pricing is dependent on the number of executions rather than pre-purchased compute capacity; isn’t it the ideal framework for that project you’ve been planning for a long time? So, go ahead and do it.

Cost Saving

One of the most significant benefits of employing Serverless architecture is the cost savings. For years, the expense of providing servers and keeping a 24×7 server crew, which ate into your budget, is no longer an issue. Serverless has an execution-based pricing strategy, which means you are only paid for the number of executions you perform.

You’re given a set number of seconds to use, which fluctuates depending on how much RAM you need. Similarly, the cost per MS (millisecond) changes depending on the quantity of memory used. With a peak execution time of 300 seconds for most Cloud vendors, shorter running functions are more suited to this paradigm.

The winner here is Serverless Architecture.


Serverless functions can only be accessed via private APIs, which is a disadvantage. You’ll need to set up an API Gateway to get access to these. This has no bearing on your pricing or process, but it does imply that you won’t be able to access them using the standard IP address.

The winner here is Traditional Architecture.

3rd Party Dependencies

The majority, if not all, of your projects, rely on libraries that aren’t included in the language or framework you’re using. You frequently use libraries that provide cryptography, image processing, and other features; these libraries might be rather large. You must bundle these dependencies within the program itself if you don’t have system-level access.

It’s not always a smart idea to reinvent the wheel.

The context determines the winner in this case. Serverless wins for basic applications with few dependencies; Traditional Architecture wins for anything more sophisticated.


It’s just as simple to set up multiple Serverless environments as it is to set up one. Because it’s pay-per-execution, it’s a significant advance over traditional servers in that you don’t have to set up development, staging, or production machines. At some point, you’d lose track of the many environments.

The winner here is Serverless Architecture.


A hard timeout limit of 300 seconds applies to Serverless computing. Serverless isn’t appropriate for too sophisticated or long-running routines, but a strict timeout makes certain activities impossible to complete. Serverless is unsuitable for applications with variable execution periods, as well as certain services that require data from an external source, due to the hard limit on this time.

Traditional Architecture comes out on top.


Although the scaling process for Serverless is seamless and automatic, there is a lack of control or complete lack of control. While automated scaling is convenient, it’s tough to address and prevent issues associated with new Serverless instances.

Serverless and Traditional Architecture are tied for first place.

Functions as a Service (FaaS)

FaaS is a Serverless architecture implementation in which engineers can deploy a single function or piece of business logic. They start in milliseconds (for AWS Lambda, it’s 100ms) and handle individual requests within a 300-second timeout imposed by most cloud providers.

Principles of FaaS:

  • Complete management of servers
  • Invocation based billing
  • Event-driven and instantaneously scalable

Key properties of FaaS:

Independent, server-side, logical functions.

FaaS are small, distinct units of logic that take input arguments, operate on the input, and return the result, similar to the functions you’re used to creating in programming languages.


Everything is stateless with Serverless, thus you can’t save a file to disc one time and expect it to be there the next. Under the hood, any two invocations of the same function could run on distinct containers.


FaaS is designed to start up rapidly, perform its functions, and then shut down. They don’t sit around unused. The underlying containers are scrapped as long as the task is completed.


Even though functions can be called directly, they are frequently triggered by events from other cloud services, such as HTTP requests, new database entries, or inbound message notifications. In a cloud context, FaaS is frequently employed and thought of as the glue connecting services.

Scalable by default

Multiple containers can be initialized with stateless functions, allowing as many functions to execute (in parallel, if necessary) to continuously service all incoming requests.

Fully managed by a Cloud vendor

The most well-known FaaS solutions include AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, IBM OpenWhisk, and Google Cloud Functions. Typically, each service supports a variety of languages and runtimes, such as Node.js, Python,.NET Core, and Java.

The Serverless App

A web server, Lambda functions (FaaS), security token service (STS), user authentication, and a database make up a Serverless system.

Client Program – In a Modern Frontend Javascript App, the user interface of your application is rendered client-side, allowing us to use a simple, static web server.

Web Server – Amazon S3 offers a reliable and easy-to-use web server. All of our application’s static HTML, CSS, and JS files can be delivered from S3.

Lambda functions (FaaS) – AWS Lambda, Google Cloud Functions, and Microsoft Azure Functions are three popular FaaS examples. This framework takes advantage of AWS Lambda. Lambda functions will be used to build the application services for logging in and accessing data. These functions read and write data from your database and return JSON.

STS generates temporary AWS credentials (API key and secret key) for app users. The client application uses these temporary credentials to call the Amazon Web Services API (and thus invoke Lambda).

User authentication -AWS Cognito, an identity service coupled with AWS Lambda, You can add user sign-up and sign-in to your mobile and online apps quickly and effortlessly using Amazon Cognito. It can also authenticate users using social identity providers like Facebook, Twitter, or Amazon, as well as SAML identity solutions and your identity system.

Database — AWS DynamoDB is a NoSQL database that is completely self-managed. Although DynamoDB is not required for a serverless application, it is presented here as an example.

Benefits of Serverless Architecture                           

From a business perspective:

A serverless application’s cost is determined by the number of function executions, which are measured in milliseconds rather than hours.

Process agility: Smaller deployable units result in faster feature delivery to the market, allowing for greater flexibility in response to change.

  • The cost of employing backend infrastructure experts is decreasing.
  • Operating costs have been reduced.
  • From the standpoint of the developer, there’s less risk because there’s no backend infrastructure to worry about.
  • There is no system administration required.
  • Operational management is simplified.
  • Nanoservices, Microservices, and SOA Principles are encouraged to be adopted.
  • Setup time is reduced.
  • There’s no need to be concerned about the number of concurrent requests because it’s scalable.
  • Monitoring out of the box.
  • Fosters innovation.

Customers will receive new features faster than before if businesses use their competitive advantage to provide features faster.

It’s feasible that users will be able to create their storage backend with more ease (i.eDropbox, Google Drive).

Client-side caching, which delivers a better offline experience, is more common in these types of programs.

Drawbacks of Serverless Architecture

From a business perspective:

  • Reduced overall control.
  • Vendor lock-in necessitates a higher level of trust in a third-party provider.
  • An increase in risk necessitates a higher level of trust in a third-party source.
  • Security risk.
  • Disaster recovery risk
  • Because the number of executions is not predetermined, the cost is unpredictable.

All of these disadvantages can be avoided using open-source alternatives, albeit at the sacrifice of the previously noted cost benefits.

Immature technology leads to component fragmentation and ambiguous best practices from the developer’s perspective.

  • Architectural complexity.
  • The self-discipline needed to avoid function sprawl.
  • Because of multi-tenancy, it’s theoretically conceivable for neighboring functions to hog system resources behind the scenes.
  • Testing locally becomes tricky.
  • Significant restrictions on the local state.
  • Execution duration is capped.
Lack of operational tools

From user perspective

An app’s user experience may suffer as a result of increased request latency if it is not properly designed.

Serverless Frameworks

Serverless platforms require infrastructure to run on, and provider agnostic frameworks give a platform-independent approach to define and deploy Serverless code on a variety of cloud platforms and commercial services.

  • Serverless Framework (JavaScript, Python, Golang)
  • Apex (JavaScript)
  • ClaudiaJS (JavaScript)
  • Sparta (Golang)
  • Gordon (JavaScript)
  • Zappa (Python)
  • Up (JavaScript, Python, Golang, Crystal)


Serverless architecture is undoubtedly intriguing, but it is not without its drawbacks. The validity and success of architectures are determined by business requirements rather than technology alone. In the same manner, when used correctly, Serverless may shine. Serverless architecture is implemented in many best web development companies in Chennai.