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

Reliability: It’s not great

community.fly.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 476 posts

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#241

Post by notpushkin »

satvikpendem wrote: post #227
notpushkin wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a nice idea actually, thank you! Just launched one: https://discord.gg/9EAne8g2Pq (Bridged to Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#lunni:matrix.org ) Lunni is actually pretty young in terms of community (just me and a few friends now :-), so just a room in Telegram was sufficient so far, but I think it's a good time to start something more official.

Thanks, just joined. One thing I noticed is that the CI/CD setup for GitHub/lab is still based on the CI files themselves. What I like about Coolify and didn't like about others is that I could simply install a GitHub app to my account and Coolify would automatically pull my repositories and even set up git push to deploy for me, no messing around with CI files needed. https://lunni.dev/docs/deploy/from-git/#github v…

I haven't thought of an app yet, but a custom GitHub Action was definitely on my radar. IIRC this would still be a one-click setup, but more integrated with the Actions UI, and will be easier to extend / override later, if needed. What do you think?

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#242

Post by gizmo »

Trufa wrote: post #99
gizmo wrote: post #44

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…

I don’t get what you’re saying, this isn’t a brag disguised as a confession, they are actually admitting to poor performance, of course it’s to eventually make users trust them, but a) I don’t see nothing bad with that b) they are choosing the hard route. They are being open and transparent (afaik) even if carefully worded, which I also don’t blame them for.

I don't agree. Fly.io took on 40m in venture capital and is now on a do-or-die mission towards a $400 million exit. This might be obvious to many here on HN but most developers don't understand these startup dynamics and the consequences of a growth-at-any-cost strategy.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#243

Post by andy_ppp »

How easy is it to deploy things with GitHub actions, AWS and terraform instead? I think I’d like full infrastructure control after having accidentally got a job doing DevOps which I’m starting to get quite into. I should probably write up a blogpost about converting everything over…

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#244

Post by satvikpendem »

notpushkin wrote: post #241
satvikpendem wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, just joined. One thing I noticed is that the CI/CD setup for GitHub/lab is still based on the CI files themselves. What I like about Coolify and didn't like about others is that I could simply install a GitHub app to my account and Coolify would automatically pull my repositories and even set up git push to deploy for me, no messing around with CI files needed. https://lunni.dev/docs/deploy/from-git/#github v…

I haven't thought of an app yet, but a custom GitHub Action was definitely on my radar. IIRC this would still be a one-click setup, but more integrated with the Actions UI, and will be easier to extend / override later, if needed. What do you think?

Sounds good. I recommend going through the Coolify install and set up process (and adding applications and services, as Coolify calls them) which would give you more insight as to how they set it up.

By GitHub app I meant that Coolify makes you install its own custom GitHub app that then allows you to git push to deploy.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#246

Post by metadat »

anurag wrote: post #136
te_chris wrote: post #48

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…

I admire your sentiment, at the same time founding teams don't typically say no to US$XX,XXX,XXX,XXX acquisition offers that'd cash you out for at least a few billion to you personally.

Are there any examples where the capitalism bottom line is ignored and a company keeps growing with extremely premium generous acquisition offers on the table? I can't think of any, but there could be a few. However, I expect it's pretty rare.

For companies with such tremendous growth, the venture capitalist firms are primarily looking to make their return and push priorities accordingly (understandably).

The only constant in life is change, it's best to focus on what you can do right now, today, and only put out promises or commitments that you have the necessary influence to follow through on. Some things are bigger than each of us.

Best wishes and godspeed to you and fly.io!

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#247

Post by [deleted] »

ghiculescu wrote: post #121
samwillis wrote: post #18

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 coincidentally tweeted the exact same thing earlier today. I selfishly hope Fly put all their focus toward becoming Heroku 2.0. I’m sure some people care about all the edge latency stuff but I don’t know many of them.

[deleted]

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#248

Post by notpushkin »

doodlesdev wrote: post #212
notpushkin wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dokku is also nice and battle-tested: https://dokku.com/ 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.

How do Coolify and Dokku compare? I've been aware of Dokku for a long time already, however I've never been confident enough to rely on these interfaces to deploy applications, specially because of their business model to keep things going. I'll have to try them both eventually though, I absolutely hate PaaS honestly, the prices are all just too high, but the convenience is really nice when managing a multitude of se…

I think overall Coolify is a bit more modern. It uses some different components (e. g. Traefik vs Nginx for reverse proxying), and includes a UI in its basic package (Dokku was CLI only for a long time, now they have Dokku Pro with a Web UI). Otherwise it looks like the architecture is pretty much the same.

Re: business model: both Coolify and Dokku are open source, so even if their development stops, you can continue to use them no matter what. (You do have to pay for your own servers though :-) So it's not a PaaS in the traditional sense (like Fly.io or Heroku), but more like “build your own PaaS” thing.

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#249

Post by notpushkin »

satvikpendem wrote: post #244
notpushkin wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't thought of an app yet, but a custom GitHub Action was definitely on my radar. IIRC this would still be a one-click setup, but more integrated with the Actions UI, and will be easier to extend / override later, if needed. What do you think?

Sounds good. I recommend going through the Coolify install and set up process (and adding applications and services, as Coolify calls them) which would give you more insight as to how they set it up. By GitHub app I meant that Coolify makes you install its own custom GitHub app that then allows you to git push to deploy.

I'll give it a go, thank you so much!

Re: Reliability: It’s not great

#250

Post by mixmastamyk »

otterley wrote: post #231
tptacek wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are asking to HashiCorp products to do things they were not designed to do, in configurations that they don't expect to be deployed in. Take a step back, and the idea of a single global namespace bound up with Raft consistency for a fleet deployed in dozens of regions, providing near-real-time state propagation, is just not at all reasonable. Our state propagation needs are much closer to those of a routing protoc…

Well, why did you do that? If you’d asked them whether this was a supported configuration or intended purpose, they’d have said no; and anyone who had experience deploying Consul at large scale would have told you the same. There is truly no compression algorithm for experience.

I don't think he personally designed the first implementation. But in any case, understanding of complex topics comes in waves.

Many times I've had to read all the docs then use a system for several months before the epiphany hits me.

Post reply on HN