Live data from Hacker News

Running costs for running a web app

cushionapp.com

71–80 of 225 posts

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#71
Anyone here have any thoughts on AppEngine vs Heroku?

I use AppEngine for my experimental projects because I can get a simple data model and some handlers running in minutes and a (supposedly automatically scalable) useful backend up in less than a day, and at very low cost. (Virtually free if I use an *.appspot.com domain).

You do get lockin issues but don't you also get lockin from Heroku? Is there big advantages to Heroku that make it worth it?

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#72
post #4

Heroku is without a doubt one of the more expensive options out there. SSL being billed per month? Yikes. SSL really should be standard.

As far as I can tell, the cost of the SSL endpoint on Heroku is almost exactly the same as the cost of a separate Elastic Load balancer, which you need to terminate the SSL connection before it reaches your app. So Heroku is really just selling this feature at cost.

I don't remember additional charge for using SSL with ELB (but ELB is extremely dumb so if you want to apply fancy headers and rules, ELB is out of question, either roll out Nginx or HAProxy with ELB governing failover. Direct R53 failover only works with public zone).

Looking at https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/ssl-endpoint using SSL as an addon for $20/M is expensive. With ELB I can pay namecheap for an SSL cert for like $10-$30 once and be done with it.

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#73
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dividing your architecture into separate components is not only needed for operating at scale (the "nice" problem to have), but for having high availability (or even decent performance) at all. Depending on one's business, HA/performance may not matter that much, but personally my startup is having a 'proper' design from day 1 - downtime is not acceptable for my business model.

I'm not disagreeing that in some cases it's true. But as someone who provides infrastructure for a great many businesses including startups, most everyone changes their tune when their server goes down.

That's entirely true. But maybe those startups which 'changed their tune' didn't have to worry about servers for N months, focusing in e.g. market fit and growth hacking instead. Lean Startup mode.

Personally I'm pretty confident about market-fit and expected growth even before the launch day of my startup.

But that's not the case, most times!

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#74
post #4

Heroku is without a doubt one of the more expensive options out there. SSL being billed per month? Yikes. SSL really should be standard.

The bill looks huge. You can get SSL for like $8/year from reseller for one of the Symantec ones.

I think that starting startup can cut a lot of corners by using open source resources and cheap cloud servers like DO.

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#75

Anyone here have any thoughts on AppEngine vs Heroku? I use AppEngine for my experimental projects because I can get a simple data model and some handlers running in minutes and a (supposedly automatically scalable) useful backend up in less than a day, and at very low cost. (Virtually free if I use an *.appspot.com domain). You do get lockin issues but don't you also get lockin from Heroku? Is there big advantages t…

I haven't used AppEngine, but getting a heroku instance up takes less than an hour. If I did it more often, I'd think it could be done for a typical CRUD app in An instance on DigitalOcean would be more like 2 hours.

There's no lockin that I've experienced on Heroku.

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#76

I always find breakdowns like this interesting. Just to get a feel for what others are using, their reasoning, and to generalize what others are spending monthly/annually. With more breakdowns like this from more companies, I think it provides a great understanding of costs. It also can give people a good baseline for understanding what costs are at certain levels of users and with certain functionality. While I unde…

I agree and would add that it's easy to look at their spend and think that's a waste, but I think with many endeavors, an individual's time is usually the scarcest resource.

Web services expenses aren't even close to their cost of adding an additional employee to solve these problems in-house.

Learning to automate something a more seasoned *NIX veteran could do in an hour is not always a predictable time expense, and then they might create bugs or run into other issues. $100/month can a bargain and buy you time to do more important things.

Researching services to use can turn into a black hole. There is always a better service that you don't know about. It can be better to decide "I will spend one hour researching metrics/dashboard services, and pick the best one I find, and spend another testing out the service." rather than trying to end up with the most perfect solution and testing every solution there is.

That said, sometimes it's more time efficient to avoid having one extra service to maintain. One has to avoid using a service in a way that the business is too dependent on it, or that the service is not easily replaced. That's just part of what makes running a business hard.

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#77

Anyone here have any thoughts on AppEngine vs Heroku? I use AppEngine for my experimental projects because I can get a simple data model and some handlers running in minutes and a (supposedly automatically scalable) useful backend up in less than a day, and at very low cost. (Virtually free if I use an *.appspot.com domain). You do get lockin issues but don't you also get lockin from Heroku? Is there big advantages t…

You get lockin issues with any vendor - even server colocation :)

AppEngine is a great tool for a great price. It scales smoothly with an affordable increase in pricing.

Heroku is sort of famous for getting too expensive at large scale. Their advantages are their ecosystem (most of the additional services listed in the OP can be installed quickly, and you're still only billed by Heroku), and their UIs which tend to be easy to understand and operate.

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#78
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if you hire them from Silicon Valley. There's plenty of skilled people in areas with low cost of living that can handle the job without 10x the pay of whoever. There should be at least one such person on the team anyway if the business is a web application . Plus, aren't there alternatives to services like Heroku these days that come as appliances or VM's with simple deployment? I'm seriously asking because I d…

Their total costs between Heroku and Redis infrastructure are less than $3000. I don't think you'd be able to hire a devops engineer for less than $30k, anywhere. It's surprising to me that people think they're spending a lot on infrastructure when they spend $800 on fonts, etc. When you drop the payment processor charges (which are per transaction) they're at $7k to run a site with a lot of functionality for a year.…

You don't get an engineer in my model: you usually share one with others. Someone who throws together this stuff all the time usually has premade images, scripts, checklists, etc that make it very efficient. You become one of their many customers. This might be a person or a firm. It's just one that focuses on great cost-benefit as differentiator.

So, one $30-50k engineer gets split 5-10 ways on infrastructure. Most maintenance is automated with setup and occasionally fixing something using up most time. You usually negotiate 1 day to a week of dedicated time out of the month w/ split being flexible.

Heroku and Redis might still come out a better deal. It's just not going to be nearly as different as people think because one doesn't have to load-up on IT people to deploy or maintain common configurations. All kinds of consultants and smaller fish that will do it way cheaper [than you mentioned] with cost spread across multiple, small businesses.

Re: Running costs for running a web app

#79

Anyone here have any thoughts on AppEngine vs Heroku? I use AppEngine for my experimental projects because I can get a simple data model and some handlers running in minutes and a (supposedly automatically scalable) useful backend up in less than a day, and at very low cost. (Virtually free if I use an *.appspot.com domain). You do get lockin issues but don't you also get lockin from Heroku? Is there big advantages t…

Heroku offers more integration addon/services than App Engine ever does. Heroku was definitely invented to compete with App Engine. Google did not have a Cloud Platform at the beginning for you to create and integrate MySQL as a service with App Engine app.
Post reply on HN