Glitch can run nodejs+static web+hide keys
Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
21–30 of 30 posts
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#22Glitch can run nodejs+static web+hide keys
What about for persistent storage? Looking for something close to free in that department
Database or key/value storage, decent connection performance
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#23Try Glitch, I am hosting some websites there, with $10 a month you can host multiple small sites. Or pay $5 for a Digital Ocean, but probably needs a little bit more configurations
$5 DO running a database I manually add could probably be great
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#24$5 Digital Ocean droplet with the one-click NodeJS install: https://marketplace.digitalocean.com/apps/nodejs
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#25Netlify will suit your use case, probably for free
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#26render.com for $7 a month.
Digitalocean is $5 but you need to handle all the management that comes with it.
with render you just point it to a github repo and you're done.
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#27Try Glitch, I am hosting some websites there, with $10 a month you can host multiple small sites. Or pay $5 for a Digital Ocean, but probably needs a little bit more configurations
I'll need to give Glitch hosting another look. When they first launched there were frequent issues with domains not connecting, or SSL issues, or projects would just go down entirely. I hope they've made progress since then because I really want to like Glitch's hosting as much as I love their editor.
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#28I think on a budget it’s hard to beat Cloudflare workers.
I’ve never been a fan of the serverless model, building on AWS Lambda etc, wiring up API gateways, slow cold starts, the hidden extra costs, EGRESS, gateway pricing etc.
Recently trying Cloudflare workers has been a pleasant experience. It’s still early, a few rough edges and limits to work within etc but I’m pretty convinced they are going to disrupt the serverless market. Fastly’s C@E is even more exciting being WASI but although Fastly advertise it as available you cannot go to their website give them your credit card number and use C@E. Likewise when C@E is generally available if the pricing is like the CDN it’ll be a non starter outside of business use.
Back to Cloudflare workers. Generous free tier, good non free tier pricing, static hosting, globally distributed workers by default, fast cold starts, WASM support, KV persistence, hook in to the cache easily, distributed objects for persistence if you can work around limitations. No need wiring up API gateways etc, write a traditional monolithic api with a router.
If you can design around utilising cloudflare it’d likely scale better than any cheap vps. I got a very long way for free with cloudflare then had to pay all of $5 to upgrade my plan as a worker needed 12ms cpu time instead of 10ms as was connecting to an Azure CosmosDb database and I think request signing eat in to my cpu budget.
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#29Take a look at this free serverless options for developer https://freestuff.dev/tags/serverless/
Re: Ask HN: Cheap back end for static website
#30Without knowing what your tech stack is or what your familiar in, I'd consider Vercel and their serverless functions. They support Node.js, Go, Python and Ruby [1] and also have a very generous free tier in my opinion [2]. [1] https://vercel.com/docs/serverless-functions/supported-langu... [2] https://vercel.com/docs/platform/limits
that was surprisingly easy for the static site deployment with the Git integration, CDN, SSL, HTTPS out the box serverless functions require the $20/month plan? hmmmm but lambda will be free for me, although if I use a database it won't be edit: the usage limits document you posted says there are serverless functions available for hobby/free tier, but the dashboard says the serverless is only available for pro plan.…
Only the "Serverless Function Region" feature, meaning being able to select which specific region a Serverless Function runs in, is only available for Pro Teams.
It seems as if this wasn't clear from the UI. Would you agree? It sounds like you've assumed that it's the entire Serverless Function feature that would not be available.