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

351–357 of 357 posts

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#351

Post by frafra »

pier25 wrote: post #318
frafra wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is cool, but it does not scale to zero, so if you have N services you will end up paying for at least N instances.

That's a good thing actually since it means you never have cold starts (unlike Google Cloud Run). Their micro instances cost like $3-4 which isn't that much.

It should be an option in my opinion, as cold start time could vary a lot by which image and runtime you are running, if is a Java app or a statically linked Rust program. I have a bunch of very small and simple services, which I run on a single VPN. Moving to fly.io would mean to pay various time more. I tried that, and the service is nice indeed, but not for me I guess.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#352

Post by bastawhiz »

stickfigure wrote: post #346
bastawhiz wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This still seems ridiculous. Why did I need to keep secrets in my repo to begin with? GAE, as far as I can tell, has been the only major PaaS that hasn't offered a solution for this. It's so easy to get wrong...it contradicts one of the biggest rules of version control: keep your secrets out of your repo.

There are a million ways to do it that don't require Google? Your CI system builds the production image, it can get secrets from anywhere.

My CI system arguably shouldn't have access to production secrets any more than my developers' macbooks.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#353

Post by etherealG »

aliswe wrote: post #336
lnenad wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is always great until there is a bug somewhere in the infr layer. Then having k8s is no longer such a good idea.

A non tech person could say the same about having an "app" at all.

True, but at while later of “tech” is useful to you? I often solve problems with only google sheets. Why bother with an app if you don’t need it. Same for other layers of “infra”.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#354

Post by hacklivelove »

pier25 wrote: post #172
user5994461 wrote: post #75

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 m…

There are more options than Heroku: - Google App Engine (PaaS) - Google Cloud Run (serverless containers) - Fly.io (serverless containers with a minimum of 1 container running per configured region)

also Jelastic PaaS, and the price is more flexible there

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#355

Post by pwdisswordfish0 »

mrkurt wrote: post #223
pwdisswordfish0 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to there being no self-service, the kinds of people who want this aren't going to be using Fly.io in the first place. Look at the prices. DigitalOcean's $5 droplet would cost over $50/month on Fly.

That's not true. Our CPU VMs are similar to DO's CPU optimized droplets. The cheaper droplets are all shared CPU.

No, what I wrote is true based on the info listed on fly.io. Either those prices and specs are incorrect, or your comment is narrowly focusing on the CPU axis (which still doesn't make for a good comparison, considering the options Fly gives are $2.67 or $8) and calling it sufficient. DigitalOcean's cheapest droplet comes with 1GB RAM, whereas to match that with Fly, that's $35 minimum. You don't get to ignore that. Add in the costs listed under Fly's "Network prices" and we're nowhere close to $5.

If for some convoluted reason this is wrong, then you guys really need to reconsider how you're presenting your prices and to lay out exactly what those convoluted reasons are, because Fly's pricing page certainly tells people that trying to match DigitalOcean's $5 plan is going to cost 10x on Fly.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#356

Post by sneak »

names_are_hard wrote: post #342
sneak wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You shouldn’t trust Digital Ocean, either. They’ve a history of being shady liars about platform security. https://github.com/fog/fog/issues/2525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6983097

I read that thread, it's quite concerning. Now I'm wondering how to determine if other providers are doing the same thing. I suppose I can test on a new instance, but that can only tell me definitively if they are doing it, not if they're not.

The thread is 7 years old, and DO hired competent people along the way.

The issue is not that it happened, or that they had clueless staff; the issue is that their board and senior management thought that the best way to respond to their own error was to blatantly lie in their blog that there was no problem at all.

It seems to have worked; they're massively valuable now.

Re: DigitalOcean App Platform

#357

Post by gen220 »

NOGDP wrote: post #274
TylerE wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're reading it wrong. For $5/month you can get 250GB of storage with 1TB outgoing. Additional is $1/100GB and $10/TB

I must be missing something: https://i.imgur.com/3PNqSt5.png Edit: You're talking about spaces[1], I'm talking about volumes[2]. [1] https://www.digitalocean.com/products/spaces/ [2] https://www.digitalocean.com/products/block-storage/

In digital ocean, I believe you get a volume for free with your $5/month instance/droplet (it's not added separately, which differs from most other cloud providers).

The screenshot you shared is attempting to add additional volumes to a droplet. See the pricing for droplets, it includes 25GB of SSD and 1TB of transfer.

https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/#basic-droplets

Post reply on HN