So double billing would generally refer a vendor charging the customer for the same product twice. In the case of FaaS vendor’s double billing refers to the synchronous invocation of other functions. When a function makes a call to another service, you pay for the waiting time — even if the code is using async I/O. This means you wait for the result of each function called, and hence must pay for the wait time. This wait time is directly correlated to section.
So in all. this additional billing violates one of the serverless principles: pay for what you use, not idle time!
Without intrinsic support from the FaaS vendor, it is impossible to avoid double billing while still maintaining the core principle of the serverless computing model.
Data-scientist who loves to use #datascienceforgood, especially in ecology, energy and the environment. Bonsai, gardening, bikes and music when I'm not at a keyboard.
Hey Dave!
So double billing would generally refer a vendor charging the customer for the same product twice. In the case of FaaS vendor’s double billing refers to the synchronous invocation of other functions. When a function makes a call to another service, you pay for the waiting time — even if the code is using async I/O. This means you wait for the result of each function called, and hence must pay for the wait time. This wait time is directly correlated to section.
So in all. this additional billing violates one of the serverless principles: pay for what you use, not idle time!
Without intrinsic support from the FaaS vendor, it is impossible to avoid double billing while still maintaining the core principle of the serverless computing model.
Got it. Cheers :)