7 ms·

As some have said, this seems expensive. However, I would point out that the costs of using Heroku should be outweighed by the convenience and ability to focus

As some have said, this seems expensive. However, I would point out that the costs of using Heroku should be outweighed by the convenience and ability to focus on features. You are getting what you pay for here, the velocity you gain from not worrying about your infrastructure. I do think that when you are first launching a startup, you should probably do everything as cheaply as possible, which probably means using a VPS or IaaS. As soon as your infrastructure becomes more complicated, you can use Heroku instead of hiring people to manage it for a while. Then see where your growth takes you -- you will probably find that eventually it makes more sense to hire a couple people to manage some IaaS or even renting racks and buying hardware. As with all things in life, it really depends. I believe this particular configuration makes sense for companies who want to focus on product, not infrastructure -- at a cost of expensive hosting.

yoyo_io 11y ago
Cost of getting one dedicated devops engineer would surpass Heroku budget by 10X. If devops engineer is far fetched as per scale of the company than count in number of hours put in by developers for initial up, upgrade, new emlpoyee on boarding tada tada would easily bet it too. However I wish they would have disclosed traffic handled by Heroku servers as well.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  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 don't work on that stuff but swore such products pop up all the time.
  - _bpo 11y ago
    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. Seems pretty reasonable.
    - nickpsecurity 11y ago
      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.
      - mbesto 11y ago
        This doesn't take into account the following transactions: - The time and money it takes to find said $30-50k engineer - The risk (and therefore potential cost) if the engineer doesn't do the job correctly - The unknown cost of "occasionally fixing" could be $50 or $50,000. Given how nebolus the DevOps position is, you also can't be sure the stuff this individual is doing is considered best practice. - There is overhead time spent on managing such a resource (teleconferencing, IM's, etc) - There is potential that the resource is unavailable and therefore a potential downtime that could cause your business loss There's a reason Heroku exists and has been successful, and these are just a few of them.
  - axelfontaine 11y ago
    For JVM apps Boxfuse (https://boxfuse.com https://boxfuse.com) gives you dead-easy deployment to plain AWS by generating minimal VM images that run unchanged both locally on VirtualBox and in the cloud. It follows the principles of immutable infrastructure (machines are disposable and never modified) and all updates are performed as zero-downtime blue/green deployments.
    - nickpsecurity 11y ago
      Now that is a bit closer to what I'm talking about. I appreciate the tip about this service as I know some Java people that might like it. You might find it interesting that these Java VM services are actually similar to what safety-critical, embedded industry has been doing for a while: http://www.aonix.com/pdf/PercDatasheet.pdf http://www.aonix.com/pdf/PercDatasheet.pdf They run POSIX and safety-critical apps side-by-side on a microkernel (eg QNX, INTEGRITY) w/ latter usually on a built-for-purpose runtime like PERC. They also would combine app, dependencies, and runtime into one image that could go into a ROM. Services like Boxfuse are doing it for cloud but the model goes back over a decade with proven benefit. Goes back further in security kernels (eg Aesec's GEMSOS or BAE's XTS-400) where they did same thing for preventing sensitive components from leaking to ported POSIX/Linux apps. So, it goes back almost three decades now. That's how long it takes industry to learn apparently. ;) EDIT: Wait, you're the founder rather than just a user. You might have heard of some of this advanced, clever Java stuff already then. Haha.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
yeukhon 11y ago
> As soon as your infrastructure becomes more complicated, you can use Heroku instead of hiring people to manage it for a while. I would expect the other way around. In fact, "for a while" doesn't work in real life. So moving from AWS to Herkou then migrate to another IaaS? That's going to be really costly. My pitch is use the tool you are more comfortable with at the beginning. When you grow to a reasonable size, I would start creating infrastructure on AWS directly (or other IaaS providers). I work with AWS daily so if I were to start my business I'd build on AWS first (plus there is AWS startup credits that you can apply). YMMV.
AznHisoka 11y ago
"As soon as your infrastructure becomes more complicated, you can use Heroku instead of hiring people to manage it for a while" Having a Iaas/Paas doesn't mean you don't have to manage anything - that's a myth. Sure, it might be doable if you own a trivial app with just 1 web server + 1 app server + 1 database server. But once you're doing anything remotely complex like building a 10-node Elasticsearch cluster that is running out of RAM, or a 10 Cassanda node cluster, or a Kafka queue that can overfill, you always need an engineer to manage your infrastructure.
- bpicolo 11y ago
  Wouldn't call that true. There are hosted solutions for ES, Cass, and AWS has kafka alternatives. That's not to say no enginenering time will be spent, but certainly you can start without a full time infrastructure guy
  - AznHisoka 11y ago
    Yes, you can start, but once your app matures and you rely on it for production, you definitely need an engineer that you can rely on if things blow up. I know companies that don't rely on any hosted cloud services for our infrastructure, and have just 1-2 people they rely on to be that infrastructure guy, and even they are not 100% full-time. It's only when things blow up that they tell him to stop what he's currently doing, and address the issues. Unless you have 10K+ employees, you'll be hard pressed to find companies that have full-time engineers that just twiddle their thumbs, and stare at a monitoring dashboard 40 hours a week to monitor a component.
morgante 11y ago
Until you have real usage, Heroku and its ilk will be very cheap. Hence, there's no reason to start on anything besides Heroku.

yoyo_io 11y ago

Cost of getting one dedicated devops engineer would surpass Heroku budget by 10X. If devops engineer is far fetched as per scale of the company than count in number of hours put in by developers for initial up, upgrade, new emlpoyee on boarding tada tada would easily bet it too. However I wish they would have disclosed traffic handled by Heroku servers as well.

nickpsecurity 11y ago
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 don't work on that stuff but swore such products pop up all the time.
- _bpo 11y ago
  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. Seems pretty reasonable.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    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.
    - mbesto 11y ago
      This doesn't take into account the following transactions: - The time and money it takes to find said $30-50k engineer - The risk (and therefore potential cost) if the engineer doesn't do the job correctly - The unknown cost of "occasionally fixing" could be $50 or $50,000. Given how nebolus the DevOps position is, you also can't be sure the stuff this individual is doing is considered best practice. - There is overhead time spent on managing such a resource (teleconferencing, IM's, etc) - There is potential that the resource is unavailable and therefore a potential downtime that could cause your business loss There's a reason Heroku exists and has been successful, and these are just a few of them.
- axelfontaine 11y ago
  For JVM apps Boxfuse (https://boxfuse.com https://boxfuse.com) gives you dead-easy deployment to plain AWS by generating minimal VM images that run unchanged both locally on VirtualBox and in the cloud. It follows the principles of immutable infrastructure (machines are disposable and never modified) and all updates are performed as zero-downtime blue/green deployments.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    Now that is a bit closer to what I'm talking about. I appreciate the tip about this service as I know some Java people that might like it. You might find it interesting that these Java VM services are actually similar to what safety-critical, embedded industry has been doing for a while: http://www.aonix.com/pdf/PercDatasheet.pdf http://www.aonix.com/pdf/PercDatasheet.pdf They run POSIX and safety-critical apps side-by-side on a microkernel (eg QNX, INTEGRITY) w/ latter usually on a built-for-purpose runtime like PERC. They also would combine app, dependencies, and runtime into one image that could go into a ROM. Services like Boxfuse are doing it for cloud but the model goes back over a decade with proven benefit. Goes back further in security kernels (eg Aesec's GEMSOS or BAE's XTS-400) where they did same thing for preventing sensitive components from leaking to ported POSIX/Linux apps. So, it goes back almost three decades now. That's how long it takes industry to learn apparently. ;) EDIT: Wait, you're the founder rather than just a user. You might have heard of some of this advanced, clever Java stuff already then. Haha.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

yeukhon 11y ago

> As soon as your infrastructure becomes more complicated, you can use Heroku instead of hiring people to manage it for a while. I would expect the other way around. In fact, "for a while" doesn't work in real life. So moving from AWS to Herkou then migrate to another IaaS? That's going to be really costly. My pitch is use the tool you are more comfortable with at the beginning. When you grow to a reasonable size, I would start creating infrastructure on AWS directly (or other IaaS providers). I work with AWS daily so if I were to start my business I'd build on AWS first (plus there is AWS startup credits that you can apply). YMMV.

AznHisoka 11y ago

"As soon as your infrastructure becomes more complicated, you can use Heroku instead of hiring people to manage it for a while" Having a Iaas/Paas doesn't mean you don't have to manage anything - that's a myth. Sure, it might be doable if you own a trivial app with just 1 web server + 1 app server + 1 database server. But once you're doing anything remotely complex like building a 10-node Elasticsearch cluster that is running out of RAM, or a 10 Cassanda node cluster, or a Kafka queue that can overfill, you always need an engineer to manage your infrastructure.

bpicolo 11y ago
Wouldn't call that true. There are hosted solutions for ES, Cass, and AWS has kafka alternatives. That's not to say no enginenering time will be spent, but certainly you can start without a full time infrastructure guy
- AznHisoka 11y ago
  Yes, you can start, but once your app matures and you rely on it for production, you definitely need an engineer that you can rely on if things blow up. I know companies that don't rely on any hosted cloud services for our infrastructure, and have just 1-2 people they rely on to be that infrastructure guy, and even they are not 100% full-time. It's only when things blow up that they tell him to stop what he's currently doing, and address the issues. Unless you have 10K+ employees, you'll be hard pressed to find companies that have full-time engineers that just twiddle their thumbs, and stare at a monitoring dashboard 40 hours a week to monitor a component.

morgante 11y ago

Until you have real usage, Heroku and its ilk will be very cheap. Hence, there's no reason to start on anything besides Heroku.