5 ms·
thing is - you don't want to have a single server for your application, even the most simple one. Even having some simple redundancy in place means having 2 web
by thinkindie 5y ago
thing is - you don't want to have a single server for your application, even the most simple one. Even having some simple redundancy in place means having 2 webservers, 2 database servers (separated from the webservers). And even for storage, S3 is not evaluated under the only metrics of storage size, but availability and durability too.
- nicoburns 5y agoAs a small startup you don't really need redundancy. Regular backups is likely good enough.
- comprev 5y ago24/7 operations is the norm these days and I'd be surprised if the client doesn't want redundancy.
- secabeen 5y agoI don't work in a small startup (large non-profit), and our SLAs are best-effort only outside M-F 8am-5pm. Not everyone is trying to build a global-scale stack.
- TameAntelope 5y agoAs a small startup you need to be focusing on iterating with your (potential) customers, not on how to securely set up a web server. Most startups are not hard tech problems, despite the very strong desire to make them so by a technical founder.
- nicoburns 5y agoI'm not convinced that cloud providers like AWS/GCloud/Azure are any simpler to manage. If you're talking about something like Heroku or Render then sure.
- thinkindie 5y agothey are not necessarily easier to manage but you can easily setup a redundant infrastructure with a very low effort. You can even have manually provisioned instances, but you easily spin servers in multiple availability zones and have a load balancer in front of them. Similarly you can easily setup and maintain a database in multiple availability zones without much effort.