Serverless vs. Virtual Machines: An Evolving Debate

When the cloud began, virtual machines (VMs) were the standard. However, as serverless computing has gained momentum, the question arises: will serverless replace the need for VMs? This article aims to explore the current landscape, discuss the ongoing debate, and analyze the future outlook for both technologies.

The Evolution of Cloud Computing

The cloud has transformed how we address compute resources. Traditionally, VMs were the gold standard, offering developers the ability to run entire operating systems within a container. Yet, with the rise of containerization and serverless architectures, the debate on whether these newer models will replace VMs continues.

Defining Serverless and Containers

Let's clarify the definitions: serverless and containers are not entirely virtual machines or serverless at all. Instead, they are orchestration tools that still rely on physical servers to run. In many cases, VMs are used to further compartmentalize the system. This suggests that while there is a place for both serverless and VMs in the future, the exact roles they play may evolve.

The Future of VMs: Useful, but Diminishing Usage

It is clear that VMs will still have a place in certain situations, especially for developers who need to develop and test operating systems. However, for web application development and testing, VMs may become less prominent. While VMs provide the flexibility to run different operating systems or versions of operating systems, they may not be as convenient for all use cases.

Why VMs Will Not Be Replaced by Serverless

By all accounts, serverless will not completely replace virtual machines. There will continue to be a need for VMs, and some factors contributing to this are:

Event-Based Characteristics of Serverless: Serverless is designed for event-driven architectures, meaning that code execution is tied to specific events. This makes long-running processes less viable in a serverless environment. Flexibility of VMs: VMs offer a greater degree of flexibility and control. Users can perform tasks such as debugging, applying patches, and running regression tests. Cost-Effectiveness: While serverless can be cost-effective for certain applications, it can also lead to unexpected costs if the usage increases. Development Complexity: Serverless development can be more challenging, particularly when it comes to debugging and continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines.

Many enterprises prefer to retain control over their servers, ensuring they have the necessary tools and options to manage their infrastructure effectively.

Conclusion

While serverless and containers present compelling alternatives to VMs, it appears that VMs will not be entirely phased out. Instead, the role of VMs will shift to support containerized and serverless architectures. Both technologies will coexist, with VMs providing the necessary flexibility and control, while serverless addresses specific use cases demanding event-driven, scalable solutions.