3 ms·

Honestly, this article presents a fairly ridiculous comparison. You could bump deploy times on Heroku to 20 minutes and I would still use it without a second th

by mvanga 6y ago

Honestly, this article presents a fairly ridiculous comparison. You could bump deploy times on Heroku to 20 minutes and I would still use it without a second thought. At best, I'll complain a little louder. Here's step 1 from the article: The documentation says to create a new AWS IAM role with credentials for automation. At this point, you've already failed. You are forcing more complexity on me than I have to care about when using Heroku. And the underlying complexity is worse. You need to be familiar with Gitlab's CI/CD pipelines. Your included YAML file hides all the complexity and uses all your magic variables: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/5-minute-production-app/deploy-template/-/raw/stable/deploy.yml https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/5-minute-production-app/deploy... What happens when something breaks? Quite literally, the only downside of Heroku is the pricing. Even that, I question for smaller teams where operational overhead can get way worse. I have yet to come across anything in the ballpark. Anyway, this may still be a decent setup for deploying an app to AWS perhaps, but comparing to Heroku in the title is way off base.

ljm 6y ago
Heroku's pricing is also justified IMO, since if you're using Heroku you're most likely saving money on hiring an on-call infrastructure or ops team, and saving money on having your engineers switch focus from feature development to maintaining the system, or doing dev-ops work. You're paying Heroku to do the operational stuff for you so you can spend more time building your product. That's a price well worth paying to a point, and even then I don't think the default next step is going full-blown cloud and K8S. Although that seems to be the way these days. I mean, if you've got a year's worth of runway to launch your product, then you don't really want the engineer you're paying 90k+ a year for to get bogged down in debugging a custom CI/CD pipeline.
- jrochkind1 6y ago
  > even then I don't think the default next step is going full-blown cloud and K8S What would you suggest as a 'next step' after heroku?
  - ljm 6y ago
    Switching to a VPS or two is an option. You get more control over the machines you're running.

by mvanga 6y ago

ljm 6y ago

Heroku's pricing is also justified IMO, since if you're using Heroku you're most likely saving money on hiring an on-call infrastructure or ops team, and saving money on having your engineers switch focus from feature development to maintaining the system, or doing dev-ops work. You're paying Heroku to do the operational stuff for you so you can spend more time building your product. That's a price well worth paying to a point, and even then I don't think the default next step is going full-blown cloud and K8S. Although that seems to be the way these days. I mean, if you've got a year's worth of runway to launch your product, then you don't really want the engineer you're paying 90k+ a year for to get bogged down in debugging a custom CI/CD pipeline.

jrochkind1 6y ago
> even then I don't think the default next step is going full-blown cloud and K8S What would you suggest as a 'next step' after heroku?
- ljm 6y ago
  Switching to a VPS or two is an option. You get more control over the machines you're running.