Live data from Hacker News

Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

blog.porter.run

101–110 of 230 posts

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#101

A good article, except for one big thing: this is not an end user, rather a direct competitor. Public articles that criticize competitors always run me the wrong way. I haven't used Heroku in a few years, but it has served (using the Hobby plan) as a really low cost way to host web apps. I have been reading through the comments on alternative providers, and even though I haven't used it, GCP's Cloud Deploy looks inte…

GCP Cloud Build + Cloud Run is a pretty good alternative for Heroku

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you imagine their home-grown offering would have over using S3 directly?

I thought the entire point of Heroku was that it wrapped up existing essential basic AWS offerings into a more manageable package? I’d rather not have to manage a side account for AWS, and set up the connections to it and things. I’d rather it was just there, like their database.

[deleted]

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#103

For all heroku's frustrations (and I agree with all of them in the article), it is still the only thing that "just works" for a standard monolith web app. Heroku is not cheap, but it is still cheaper than a couple full time employees + aws. It is really too bad they aren't innovating - they are just burning up their 10 year lead in the space. I wouldn't start a new project on Heroku - not because of the cost, but bec…

It blows my mind that they don't provide an object store. Almost all web apps in my experience need an object store of some kind.

I use Bucketeer plugin on Heroku but I am planning to move to S3, that is around 20x cheaper.

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#104

For all heroku's frustrations (and I agree with all of them in the article), it is still the only thing that "just works" for a standard monolith web app. Heroku is not cheap, but it is still cheaper than a couple full time employees + aws. It is really too bad they aren't innovating - they are just burning up their 10 year lead in the space. I wouldn't start a new project on Heroku - not because of the cost, but bec…

It's honestly strange how no one has eaten their lunch yet. Besides the extra services they now offer (which you aren't required for hosting a simple app), you could probably have a team bang out the basics in a few months. You could even just be a layer on top of AWS and probably make profit from not many users, as long as you're cheaper.

There are a lot of startups that have banged out the basics in a few months. The are getting mentioned all over in the threads under this article. But the basics aren't good enough. Heroku looks simple, but does a lot, and pretty much does it all right. Their documentation alone is amazing and it would take more than a few months to create docs of the same quality.

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#105
post #79

As someone that was there at Heroku after the acquisition, I don't think you can state that since the acquisition it's been consistently downhill. There isn't much debate that things have stagnated in the last 5-7 years which is a longer story on why probably. Some examples of innovation that happened and were launched after the acquisition: buildpacks (at the time of acquisition Heroku was still Ruby only), Heroku P…

I think the most interesting part of this is the PaaS disaggregation. Heroku built an exceptionally good Postgres service. They could not have done that with multiple DBs. Even their redis is pretty meh. People like us (Fly.io) will end up either building very mediocre DB offerings or collaborating with DB companies (like yours: https://www.crunchydata.com/products/crunchy-bridge/ ) to ship stuff that's substantially…

I'm curious about what "substantially better than RDS" means. RDS has been good enough for me for quite a while. Does it only matter once you get to a certain scale?

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#106

We're big Heroku customers; despite that, I largely agree with the points in this article and there's a voice in the back of my head asking every few months "is this worth it?" Whenever I research the new crop of Heroku clones (the one being hawked here, and others) the pitch is always "it's just like Heroku but you can run it in your own cloud". It's mind-boggling to me that none of the clones understands that I DON…

I had written down some thought about the various compute options available to run apps. One of my takeaways was exactly this - "Run your own PaaS on Cloud IaaS" seems too much work for too little gain.

https://ramansharma.substack.com/p/multiple-stops-on-the-clo...

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#107

First off, I would strongly disagree with the idea that Heroku post-acquisition was stagnant. As well-said elsewhere, tons of product was shipped to industry-best standards: postgres/dataclips, Heroku Connect, buildpacks - as well as introduction of CI and preview apps. But it's clear that in the post-k8s and post infra-as-code world there's been a surge in new options for how teams manage their infra and DevOps tool…

I was just looking at AWS App Runner today and just thinking about how miserable it would be to figure out how to use AWS's proprietary build pipeline tools to replicate what I have with Heroku - and I've been using AWS forever - I just hate their UX, their docs, really every thing they do except the actual infrastructure services. So I was just thinking someone should build a product that gives me the Heroku CLI, pi…

Check us out! We're on GCP for v1 (AWS is coming). Sounds like you'd like what we're building.

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#108

The year is 2022 and still no HTTP2 support. https://help.heroku.com/JAOCNZ25/does-heroku-have-plans-to-s...

Yes, this is :(, but you should be serving all your static assets through a CDN, which will have http2. I can't think of a scenario where I would want to serve anything other than the dynamic content off the heroku server. I don't think http2 buys you much there. So you should be able to get away with at most 2 requests - one to the heroku server, and one to the cdn.

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#109

We're big Heroku customers; despite that, I largely agree with the points in this article and there's a voice in the back of my head asking every few months "is this worth it?" Whenever I research the new crop of Heroku clones (the one being hawked here, and others) the pitch is always "it's just like Heroku but you can run it in your own cloud". It's mind-boggling to me that none of the clones understands that I DON…

You might like render.com

Re: Why companies move off Heroku (besides the cost)

#110
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS’s ECS Fargate with Aurora Serverless and AWS CA certificates is close.

But even that stuff is gonna be more configuration than Heroku, right? I wanna spend literally zero hours a month on server / dev ops, if I can manage it. I will pay for it and accept the constraints of simplicity.

You can invest more time up front and automate it with an IAC tool and and CI tool to build/deploy. Probably nothing will be as hands off as Heroku, but there are lots of measures that can get you closer.
Post reply on HN