FaaSKeeper: Learning from Building Serverless Services with ZooKeeper as an Example
Bibliographic record
Abstract
FaaS (Function-as-a-Service) revolutionized cloud computing by replacing persistent virtual machines with dynamically allocated resources. This shift trades locality and statefulness for a pay-as-you-go model more suited to variable and infrequent workloads. However, the main challenge is to adapt services to the serverless paradigm while meeting functional, performance, and consistency requirements. In this work, we push the boundaries of FaaS computing by designing a serverless variant of ZooKeeper, a centralized coordination service with a safe and wait-free consensus mechanism. We define synchronization primitives to extend the capabilities of scalable cloud storage and outline a set of requirements for efficient computing with serverless. In FaaSKeeper, the first coordination service built on serverless functions and cloud-native services, we explore the limitations of serverless offerings and propose improvements essential for complex and latency-sensitive applications. We share serverless design lessons based on our experiences of implementing a ZooKeeper model deployable to clouds today. FaaSKeeper maintains the same consistency guarantees and interface as ZooKeeper, with a serverless price model that lowers costs up to 110--719x on infrequent workloads.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".