←back to thread

DigitalOcean App Platform

(pages.news.digitalocean.com)
646 points digianarchist | 4 comments | 06 Oct 20 14:59 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
user5994461 ◴[06 Oct 20 17:20 UTC] No.24700185[source]▶
I am so glad to see this. I was looking to deploy an app and the choice is either Heroku or manage your own server which I don't want to do.

Heroku gives instant deployment for the most common types of apps (python/java/ruby). It's PaaS done right, it's fantastic. You should really have a look if you're not aware of it, it's only $7 for a starter app.

Problem is, scaling up is about $50 per gigabyte of memory which makes it a dead end for anything non trivial. You're forced to go to digital ocean / Linode / OVH instead to have something affordable.

That leaves Digital Ocean as the only alternative (don't trust Linode) and it sucks because it only gives me a server to manage. I don't want to manage a server I want to run a (python) application. It's 2020 this sort of things should auto deploy from GitHub without bothering me to manage an operating system.

replies(19): >>24700693 #>>24700794 #>>24701039 #>>24702228 #>>24702633 #>>24702880 #>>24703398 #>>24703543 #>>24703620 #>>24704410 #>>24704873 #>>24705031 #>>24705668 #>>24706188 #>>24706382 #>>24707003 #>>24709134 #>>24716137 #>>24727185 #
076ae80a-3c97-4 ◴[06 Oct 20 18:48 UTC] No.24701039[source]▶
It's probably worth looking into the big cloud providers rather than the little guys. In Azure you can have an app service (a deployed app in any one of loads of languages without looking after the machine it sits on) with 1.75GB RAM for about $12 a month. Obviously your usage may vary and that will effect the price. But I get the feeling that the big players are cheaper than people think they are for small projects.
replies(2): >>24701157 #>>24702367 #
user5994461 ◴[06 Oct 20 19:00 UTC] No.24701157[source]▶
The big players have separate charges for bandwidth and disk and other hidden stuff. They are way more expensive than Digital Ocean / OVH all inclusive. Worse, the costs is unpredictable which makes them a no go for a side project, I can't risk accidentally getting a $1000 bill.

As a real world example, I run a personal blog. If it were running on S3, my personal finance would have been obliterated when it got featured on HN and served 1+ TB of traffic.

replies(6): >>24701406 #>>24702400 #>>24702759 #>>24705226 #>>24705619 #>>24718090 #
earthboundkid ◴[06 Oct 20 19:25 UTC] No.24701406[source]▶
Can HN really deliver enough traffic to a static site to cost a significant amount? I've had mildly popular posts on HN for my Netlify blog (John Carmack tweeted about it!) and not had to pay for bandwidth.
replies(3): >>24702460 #>>24703261 #>>24703969 #
mdoms ◴[06 Oct 20 22:46 UTC] No.24703261[source]▶
No. I once had a site hit #1 on HN. It was hosted on a Dreamhost shared VPC with Wordpress. It barely broke a sweat. I have no idea what these guys are doing who are having their sites bulldozed by HN traffic but it's worryingly common for something that should never happen.
replies(2): >>24703486 #>>24703487 #
1. westoncb ◴[06 Oct 20 23:06 UTC] No.24703487[source]▶
This has always confused me. What is going on when someone's site is taken down by HN traffic? (Maybe the fact it's on HN when this occurs is just coincidence: maybe the real traffic loads are always from reddit or twitter or something in these cases?)

(My experience with high-ranking HN posts: initially with DreamHost, later with cheapest AWS ec2—never a noticeable impact with either)

replies(1): >>24703563 #
2. user5994461 ◴[06 Oct 20 23:16 UTC] No.24703563[source]▶
Among articles you see on the front page, there is a two orders of magnitude difference in visits between the more popular and the less popular.

HN/reddit/twitter/android can all send a similar amount of traffic. There's one order of magnitude there, how many places an article is featured at the same time?

Then there's an order of magnitude within each place, how much interest and readership the article could gather? Highly variable. The first comment alone can make or break an article.

replies(1): >>24703642 #
3. westoncb ◴[06 Oct 20 23:24 UTC] No.24703642[source]▶
This sounds off. Both reddit and twitter have the potential for vastly more traffic than HN.

I also haven’t had the number one spot on HN (except maybe briefly), but was in 2 and 3 for long stretches and even an order of magnitude more traffic wouldn’t have been a problem.

Two orders probably would have been, but I have a hard time imagining a 100x traffic difference between the 1 spot and the 2 spot. Then again, if it was a very slow day here vs a very busy day maybe (though in my case it wasn’t a very slow day).

replies(1): >>24703800 #
4. user5994461 ◴[06 Oct 20 23:46 UTC] No.24703800{3}[source]▶
I assume you're targeting reddit programming and similar subs, they're similar to HN in aggregate. You're right that Reddit and twitter have way bigger audience in total but only a fraction of all reddit users is relevant. Assume we're talking about a tech blog, not articles on election or brexit?

It's not about rank. It's about the specifics of the article, mainly the title and the content. It simply attracts more or less readership.