5 ms·

Deno deploy seems cool and all, but I haven't seen any great rationale for using their service over say Cloudflare Workers.

by jhgg 4y ago

tick_tock_tick 4y ago
Yeah unless I'm missing something isn't this just a stand alone company offering roughly workers?
- mrkurt 4y ago
  This is an open source JavaScript runtime with a hosted business model. Deno is great. Deno Deploy is a reasonable way for them to make money.
  - yencabulator 4y ago
    Meanwhile, Cloudflare says they are open sourcing Cloudflare Workers runtime: https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081 https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081
  - threatofrain 4y ago
    CloudFlare workers is on my radar because of an ecology of other "edge" products that are in the works or already released. That's what Deno would need to catchup on to be on the table for discussion for me. Otherwise it remains a toy I use in my spare time (which I do enjoy at the moment).
mattlondon 4y ago
You could say the same about AWS Azure, and GCP. Competition is good.
- jhgg 4y ago
  Competition is great - sure, but I want to know what Deno gives me over its competitors.
kjksf 4y ago
As someone who dabbled with both workers and Deno Deploy: Deno Deploy actually works. I was very excited about the idea of workers but their tooling is (or at least was when I tried it last) abysmal, buggy and hard to understand. To this day I don't know how to setup a basic dev vs. production in workers.toml. Local debugging was buggy for naked domains (even found a GitHub issue for it that languished for months with no bugfix or clear explanation / workaround) and very slow. Great idea killed by poor dev tooling. Deno deploy is the opposite of that: deploys are instant and it's obvious how to deploy. You can develop and test locally. Cloudflare released wrangler v2 (which dropped rust for node) and maybe it's better now but the one experience I had with wrangler v2 was trying to deploy a small static website (pages) and it failed due to their backend throwing 50x errors.
- johnspurlock 4y ago
  Agree regarding tooling. So much so that I wrote Denoflare (https://denoflare.dev/ https://denoflare.dev/) to make writing Cloudflare Workers using standard Deno a breeze: no wrangler, toml, webpack, npm etc required
pier25 4y ago
Workers are not meant as a generalist runtime.
- yencabulator 4y ago
  Neither is Deno Deploy, really. The limits on CPU time etc are very similar, with Cloudflare being more flexible on CPU and Deno Deploy being more flexible on bundle size. https://deno.com/deploy/docs/pricing-and-limits https://deno.com/deploy/docs/pricing-and-limits https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/platform/limits/ https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/platform/limits/
  - pier25 4y ago
    Yes Deno Deploy is for HTTP (just like CF Workers) but my point is that Deno is more of a generalist runtime compared to Workers and has a much broader appeal than just Deno Deploy. Here's an example. Deno is like any other backend runtime and has regular DB clients. CF Workers do not. If you want to use Workers with PG, the CF docs point you to Supabase which provides REST over PG using PostgREST. https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/tutorials/postgres/ https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/tutorials/postgres...
    - yencabulator 4y ago
      Yes, Cloudflare Workers originally couldn't make arbitrary outgoing TCP connections. Cloudflare wrote an adapter to transport Postgres over WebSockets (https://blog.cloudflare.com/relational-database-connectors/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/relational-database-connectors/) and then added support for TCP connections (https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-socket-workers/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-socket-workers/). Deno Deploy doesn't have much of a moat, and Cloudflare is better funded. Both are promising to be open source & self hostable (https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081 https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081). We shall see.
      - pier25 4y ago

Deno deploy seems cool and all, but I haven't seen any great rationale for using their service over say Cloudflare Workers.

by jhgg 4y ago

Deno deploy seems cool and all, but I haven't seen any great rationale for using their service over say Cloudflare Workers.

tick_tock_tick 4y ago

Yeah unless I'm missing something isn't this just a stand alone company offering roughly workers?

mrkurt 4y ago
This is an open source JavaScript runtime with a hosted business model. Deno is great. Deno Deploy is a reasonable way for them to make money.
- yencabulator 4y ago
  Meanwhile, Cloudflare says they are open sourcing Cloudflare Workers runtime: https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081 https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081
- threatofrain 4y ago
  CloudFlare workers is on my radar because of an ecology of other "edge" products that are in the works or already released. That's what Deno would need to catchup on to be on the table for discussion for me. Otherwise it remains a toy I use in my spare time (which I do enjoy at the moment).

mattlondon 4y ago

You could say the same about AWS Azure, and GCP. Competition is good.

jhgg 4y ago
Competition is great - sure, but I want to know what Deno gives me over its competitors.

kjksf 4y ago

As someone who dabbled with both workers and Deno Deploy: Deno Deploy actually works. I was very excited about the idea of workers but their tooling is (or at least was when I tried it last) abysmal, buggy and hard to understand. To this day I don't know how to setup a basic dev vs. production in workers.toml. Local debugging was buggy for naked domains (even found a GitHub issue for it that languished for months with no bugfix or clear explanation / workaround) and very slow. Great idea killed by poor dev tooling. Deno deploy is the opposite of that: deploys are instant and it's obvious how to deploy. You can develop and test locally. Cloudflare released wrangler v2 (which dropped rust for node) and maybe it's better now but the one experience I had with wrangler v2 was trying to deploy a small static website (pages) and it failed due to their backend throwing 50x errors.

johnspurlock 4y ago
Agree regarding tooling. So much so that I wrote Denoflare (https://denoflare.dev/ https://denoflare.dev/) to make writing Cloudflare Workers using standard Deno a breeze: no wrangler, toml, webpack, npm etc required

pier25 4y ago

Workers are not meant as a generalist runtime.

yencabulator 4y ago
Neither is Deno Deploy, really. The limits on CPU time etc are very similar, with Cloudflare being more flexible on CPU and Deno Deploy being more flexible on bundle size. https://deno.com/deploy/docs/pricing-and-limits https://deno.com/deploy/docs/pricing-and-limits https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/platform/limits/ https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/platform/limits/
- pier25 4y ago
  Yes Deno Deploy is for HTTP (just like CF Workers) but my point is that Deno is more of a generalist runtime compared to Workers and has a much broader appeal than just Deno Deploy. Here's an example. Deno is like any other backend runtime and has regular DB clients. CF Workers do not. If you want to use Workers with PG, the CF docs point you to Supabase which provides REST over PG using PostgREST. https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/tutorials/postgres/ https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/tutorials/postgres...
  - yencabulator 4y ago
    Yes, Cloudflare Workers originally couldn't make arbitrary outgoing TCP connections. Cloudflare wrote an adapter to transport Postgres over WebSockets (https://blog.cloudflare.com/relational-database-connectors/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/relational-database-connectors/) and then added support for TCP connections (https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-socket-workers/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-socket-workers/). Deno Deploy doesn't have much of a moat, and Cloudflare is better funded. Both are promising to be open source & self hostable (https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081 https://twitter.com/KentonVarda/status/1523666343412654081). We shall see.
    - pier25 4y ago