3 ms·

Hetzner Ubuntu Server, a good firewall configuration and automated backups. I can't think of anything easier. I tried a lot of stuff, but this just works. For i

Hetzner Ubuntu Server, a good firewall configuration and automated backups. I can't think of anything easier. I tried a lot of stuff, but this just works. For internal applications I basically block all traffic outside of our office network, activate auto updates for the OS and just stick to one version of the app for as long as I can. Edit: and only one app per server. Also only the Hetzner Cloud offering with managed backups and managed firewall.

fauigerzigerk 4y ago
How does this meet the condition "write an app, deploy it, and never think about it again"? As I'm reading it, your setup is the exact opposite of that.
- bordercontrol 4y ago
  Why do you think you need to touch them after deployment? You just pay the monthly bill. The thing is you can't just deploy and rest usually as there are often security concerns, your provider could run out of service, various system failures which require a restore of an healthy state or similiar. Even if you serve just static files, there could be the need to adjust your DNS, because the provider changed after 5 years something, or some other provider-related configuration. You really want to care for all those things at your frist deploy if you don't want to care for them long-term. The Hetzner firewall makes frequent security app updates mostly unnecessary, Ubuntu auto updates care for the security of the OS, the backups make recovery easy, if Hetzner goes out of service, you can restore your system wherever you want as it is just an Ubuntu server, by keeping only one app per server you also reduce the complexity of the system, separate the systems, so that failure can't spread. Managing a server is nowadays with offerings like Hetzner the easiest way to run apps which just need to work and don't need to scale to exponentially over time. Why add anything on top of it? It's done really within 5 minutes if you know what you do. If you need something which scales and doesn't require file storage / databases, then I'd go for the provider-agnostic Serverless framework. If you need storage and/or databases then it really depends, as Serverless gets costly at these things and more complex and there are more provider-lock-ins. Containers may make mor sense in such cases. At our company we use these two systems to reduce maintaining basically to zero.

fauigerzigerk 4y ago

How does this meet the condition "write an app, deploy it, and never think about it again"? As I'm reading it, your setup is the exact opposite of that.

bordercontrol 4y ago
Why do you think you need to touch them after deployment? You just pay the monthly bill. The thing is you can't just deploy and rest usually as there are often security concerns, your provider could run out of service, various system failures which require a restore of an healthy state or similiar. Even if you serve just static files, there could be the need to adjust your DNS, because the provider changed after 5 years something, or some other provider-related configuration. You really want to care for all those things at your frist deploy if you don't want to care for them long-term. The Hetzner firewall makes frequent security app updates mostly unnecessary, Ubuntu auto updates care for the security of the OS, the backups make recovery easy, if Hetzner goes out of service, you can restore your system wherever you want as it is just an Ubuntu server, by keeping only one app per server you also reduce the complexity of the system, separate the systems, so that failure can't spread. Managing a server is nowadays with offerings like Hetzner the easiest way to run apps which just need to work and don't need to scale to exponentially over time. Why add anything on top of it? It's done really within 5 minutes if you know what you do. If you need something which scales and doesn't require file storage / databases, then I'd go for the provider-agnostic Serverless framework. If you need storage and/or databases then it really depends, as Serverless gets costly at these things and more complex and there are more provider-lock-ins. Containers may make mor sense in such cases. At our company we use these two systems to reduce maintaining basically to zero.