Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DigitalOcean App Platform

pages.news.digitalocean.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 357 posts

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#2

Post by _kyran »

Tried this out in early access and wanted to love and use it however a few things that made it not workable:

* wildcard subdomains aren't supported.

* Only CNAMEs to digital ocean's CDN are supported (can't have an A record).

* There was no way to run a console command.

* Bandwidth is 12x higher than usual droplets and unlike standard droplets there isn't an included bandwidth pool.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#3

Post by izolate »

> If you have apps in other languages, you can quickly deploy using the App Platform by providing the appropriate Dockerfile in the source repo

I'm happy to see this. Makes it a viable contender to GCP Cloud Run, which has become my favorite way to deploy serverless apps.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#4

Post by quaffapint »

_kyran wrote: post #2

Tried this out in early access and wanted to love and use it however a few things that made it not workable: * wildcard subdomains aren't supported. * Only CNAMEs to digital ocean's CDN are supported (can't have an A record). * There was no way to run a console command. * Bandwidth is 12x higher than usual droplets and unlike standard droplets there isn't an included bandwidth pool.

The bandwidth piece is interesting. I guess if you really have a need for bandwidth just use their K8s offering which is free and you just pay for droplets (with much more bandwidth)/networking. It will require more setup, but you will end up with higher bandwidth.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#7

Post by phildougherty »

bizzleDawg wrote: post #5

I'd be interested to know if this is integrated and rebranded nanobox [0]? Or something completely from scratch? [0]: https://nanobox.io/

We certainly took a lot of inspiration and leaned on the awesome experience of the nanobox team, but this is largely a completely different architecture.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#8

Post by nikon »

Bandwidth limits seem excessive?

Outbound transfer – 40GiB per app

Overall a cool idea. Would personally still prefer GCP Cloud Run which will bill me for request time only and allow me to scale based on requests per second.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#9

Post by phildougherty »

_kyran wrote: post #2

Tried this out in early access and wanted to love and use it however a few things that made it not workable: * wildcard subdomains aren't supported. * Only CNAMEs to digital ocean's CDN are supported (can't have an A record). * There was no way to run a console command. * Bandwidth is 12x higher than usual droplets and unlike standard droplets there isn't an included bandwidth pool.

Thanks for the feedback! I will be sure to address your points with the team as we continue to develop our roadmap. One thing to point out is that there is now console access available in the product.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#10

Post by kgraves »

leadetes wrote: post #6

Digital Ocean has really changed. Just get the feeling leadership or something changed internally to pivot away from being customer/developer focused. I'll stick with gcp.

Disagree on GCP.

Extremely hesitant to GCP ever since they performed that price hike of their GKE product for their control plane.

I really can't trust them anymore, given that nearly all of Google's entire product suite can just get deprecated whenever they feel like it.

Post reply on HN