Earlier quoted context omitted.
No
Can you elaborate?
Reliability: It’s not great
151–160 of 476 posts
Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#152As someone that has started tons of Consul clusters, analyzed tons of Terraform states, developed providers and wrote a HCL parser, I must say this:
HashiCorp built a brand of consistent design & docs, security, strict configuration, distributed-algos-made-approachable... but at its core, it's a very fragile ecosystem. The only benefit of HashiCorp headaches is that you will quickly learn Golang while reading some obscure github.com/hashicorp/blah/blah/file.go :)
Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#153Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#154Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. And I know this is unpopular, but I think none of these companies should be expected to have a free tier. A low-cost tier? Certainly. Perhaps even a free trial with a credit card? Great. But our team, who has used Heroku for over a decade, got bit multiple times by Heroku having a free tier. Why were we impacted by other apps? Because Heroku’s load balancers are shared amongst all their apps. That includes a…
Nice write up! I wish I shared your enthusiasm for where Heroku could go but I have a few friends at Salesforce I've asked about how they see Heroku internally and it really doesn't seem like it is going to get much love. Hope to be wrong though.
I let them know they need to demonstrate that to me. They have a roadmap [1], but it seems to have barely anything moving forward, including some really important concepts like http/2 support.
Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#156I'm not a user of Fly.io. I can't help but notice how remarkable the effect of open communication on potential end users like me. I remember reading about their reliability problems on HN some time ago. That biased my view of the company. After reading this, the open communication and transparency restored my trust in them, and would make them again a potential candidate for future projects. Because now I know that t…
Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#157I'm bullish on fly.io.
Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#158Fundamentally I think some of the problems come down to the difference between what Fly set out to build and what the market currently want. Fly (to my understanding) at its core is about edge compute. That is where they started and what the team are most excited about developing. It's a brilliant idea, they have the skills and expertise. They are going to be successful at it. However, at the same time the market is…
> dirt simple managed Postgres Heroku PostgreSQL is very simple, yes. But once you need non-trivial scale it's expensive and extremely non-performant. Even a medium-sized RDS will outperform Heroku's most expensive database offering by 20x in my experience. My company doesn't even run PG on Heroku anymore. We have a VPC/Private Space connection to AWS Aurora because the cost/performance difference is so extreme.
I let some folks at Heroku know this who are product managers, and they are investigating it… but I would be shocked if Heroku gets a big performance improvement anytime in, say, 2023.
20X seems like a lot for RDS, though I’d be curious to learn more! We are switching to Crunchy because of that clear cost/performance difference you mention.
Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#159Fundamentally I think some of the problems come down to the difference between what Fly set out to build and what the market currently want. Fly (to my understanding) at its core is about edge compute. That is where they started and what the team are most excited about developing. It's a brilliant idea, they have the skills and expertise. They are going to be successful at it. However, at the same time the market is…
One thing we've noticed, though, is that people do actually want Heroku but close to users. It's not exactly edge compute. In some cases, it's "Heroku in Tokyo". In others it's "Heroku, but running in all the english speaking regions".
I think the thing that ate up most of our energy is also the thing that might actually make this business work. We built on top of our own hardware. That's the thing that made it difficult to build managed Postgres. We put way more energy into the underlying infrastructure than most nü-Heroku companies. The cost was extreme, but I'm like 63% sure this was the right choice.
Re: Reliability: It’s not great
#160I'm not a user of Fly.io. I can't help but notice how remarkable the effect of open communication on potential end users like me. I remember reading about their reliability problems on HN some time ago. That biased my view of the company. After reading this, the open communication and transparency restored my trust in them, and would make them again a potential candidate for future projects. Because now I know that t…
This is probably therapy, but your message and fly.io's post resonates a lot with what I'm going through. I took a product owner role about 6 months ago, my first, with a company that has turned out to be just a mired mess, and a product universally hated both internally and externally. Long story short, it's completely over-engineered by a bunch of intellectual engineers with no focus, no discipline, and no oversigh…