181–190 of 476 posts
For django, they should really contribute to 2 scoops django cookie cutter program, so that you can get an out of the box django instance that can just deploy to Fly.io.
Sqlite https://github.com/tomwojcik/django-fly-sqlite-template
Psql https://github.com/tomwojcik/django-fly-postgres-template
Fundamentally 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…
> generous free level of service, This is likely the biggest culprit for a lot of these companies. Too many of us have grown up in the culture of getting hosting and platform for "free", but at some point the companies providing it still have to pay the bills. There has to be a better pricing model that let's someone deploy their relatively small, low-traffic app for $10s/month or even $200 - $300 / year for the basi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless a company is very explicit about this not being in the books, I tend to share this outlook. From the perspective of a recent founder, it's downright spooky to build around any SaaS, considering how few of them have been around for 10+ years, when that is certainly what our business is aiming for. I know (and share the feels): Devs tend to get excited about the new thing – but if Google Workspace shut down next…
The difference between (free) Gmail and Google workspace is that workspace is a paid product. If you're big enough to warrant an AM, you can get terms which include continuity of business planning if Google does happen to shut down Workspace. (They won't.)
Fundamentally 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…
I'm going to plug Coolify, an open source Heroku alternative (with Docker support too) that I'm using on a cheap $5 Hetzner server which is a lot cheaper than the equivalent Fly or Render etc service, and it really doesn't have much upkeep from me even if you add in the time setting up the server initially, which is like an hour, and afterwards, it Just Works™. https://coolify.io
And may I also plug Lunni, a self-hosted Docker Swarm-based PaaS I'm working on right now: https://lunni.dev/
Both work pretty well on $5 servers.
This reads like a mea culpa from an indie hacker, but Fly.io had 5+ years and raised $40M to get these basic fundamentals right. And we get promises of a new status page.
Well, that's one way to look at it. Fly's been many things over the course of its lifetime [0], but I believe their latest pivot (on what they call "Machines") is pretty darn good. I've been using Machines since Oct last year, and things have gotten better week-over-week. Like with any platform, Fly has its own idiosyncrasies, which don't take much to get hang of. That said, I am the only person in my tech shop that…
Machines isn't that. From the documentation, it appears as though it's "just" a VM pinned to a single region and none of the "magic" of Fly really applies. If the server your VM is hosted on goes down, Fly won't redeploy your container. It's just downtime. Spinning up in other regions is something you have to think about and actually do. It seems closer to Heroku than it does Fly.
Maybe I am totally misunderstanding Fly Machines and their use-case, maybe they're aiming to close the gap between Machines and Fly apps. It's just a bit of a bummer to see something that looks like walking back the original "promise" of Fly and makes me question whether or not Fly is going to just become like every other PaaS (even if it's a really good one).
Fundamentally 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…
If anyone else is looking.
This reads like a mea culpa from an indie hacker, but Fly.io had 5+ years and raised $40M to get these basic fundamentals right. And we get promises of a new status page.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, that's one way to look at it. Fly's been many things over the course of its lifetime [0], but I believe their latest pivot (on what they call "Machines") is pretty darn good. I've been using Machines since Oct last year, and things have gotten better week-over-week. Like with any platform, Fly has its own idiosyncrasies, which don't take much to get hang of. That said, I am the only person in my tech shop that…
Fly Machines, if I understand them correctly, feels like a step backwards. Sure they might work better than "standard" Fly apps, but one of the motivating cases for Fly is being able to effortlessly scale across the world without having a Ph.D. in CS and a fistful of certs for Cloud engineering. That vision for Fly is awesome, game changing even, ignoring their current stability issues. Machines isn't that. From the…
Even without autoscale, spinning up Machine clones in any of the 30+ Fly regions is as easy an instant scale-out you'll likely come across on any of the NewCloud platforms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not gonna happen. Both will get acquired because that’s how things work now
(Render founder) I'd love to understand why you think this is the only outcome. Render has positive gross margin and a clear path to profitability based on both our growth so far and the tailwinds in this space. I'm also aware of other companies like ours that have grown all the way to IPO or are well on their way. I'm very explicit both internally and externally that an acquisition is a failure mode for Render. We'r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This post is carefully worded corporate messaging, but because they write for their developer audience it has an informal "oh shucks we messed up bad y'all" vibe to it. But make no mistake, this is 100% corporate messaging. I get that growing is super hard. And maybe fly will grow up to be a good platform some day. But that's the future. Today, they're flying by the seat of their pants and I mostly feel sorry for peo…
professionals don't get tricked into thinking a platform is ready for production use If you don't have SLOs and SLAs, then you get what you get, essentially. Even a company with a great reputation can completely reverse course with a single bad incident, and you get nothing in return if there's not a contract.
They can trot out a low level person to stall you with questions, or an AI question generator that maximizes the amount of time you waste on your end, and call that "SLA met".
And even if they DON'T meet the SLA on occasion, you built your stack on AWS. You are laying in the bed you made.
SO, what, AWS throws some free credits (that their 30-40% margin easily absorbs)?
The only big stick in these types of things is having dual-cloud capability, where you can move your service quickly from one cloud to the other. Stateless API servers? Maybe. Database servers? ouch. Cassandra could reliably span two clouds, man would AWS kill you on their ludicrously overpriced network costs.
Has anyone does Postgres replication across providers as a useful production system? Doubt it.