4 ms·
This is addressing all the things I don't care about at all for a static site, and then suggesting a tool that makes very little sense. If you're hosting a sta
by horsawlarway 2y ago
This is addressing all the things I don't care about at all for a static site, and then suggesting a tool that makes very little sense.
If you're hosting a static site... life is easy. Throw your content in any s3 compatible storage and point a CDN at it. Done. It will cost literal pennies a year (The domain name will be by far the most expensive piece, and lots of places will give that to you for free if you don't care about being a subdomain).
That too complicated for you? Host it on a raspberry pi out of your bedroom. For the vast majority of traffic loads... that thing is going to be A-OK, even on a crappy consumer line (You'll probably be violating your TOS with your provider if it's a commercial site... but I've found they really don't seem to care unless you're causing them headaches, and a static site ain't gonna cause many headaches).
That too complicated for you? 10 lines of js with express will stand up a prefectly functional static site. Or you literally just install nginx and configure a single server block.
Static sites are fucking easy. It is ridiculously easy to serve static content these days. And borderline free (again - the domain name is going to DWARF the rest of your costs combined, even if you're only paying 5 bucks for the name).
How do you generate your static content? Who cares - do whatever feels best to you (I personally think rails is a bonkers solution, but if you want to use rake tasks to create your output... more power to ya?)
It really sounds like the author doesn't understand what a static site is, because JAMstack also isn't a static site solution (It has API right there in the name).
If you need to be consuming APIs with changing data... you aren't a static site (even if the html/js/css you serve happens to be static). In which case... rails is a fine choice, but if you're only serving the html/js/css and hitting 3rd party apis... I would still recommend an s3 bucket with a CDN.
- rogerrogerr 2y agoI’ve always been a bit wary of putting a static site on S3 specifically - what happens if I piss someone off, and they have a botnet just load my site a zillion times? A few kb * a zillion = large egress bill. I haven’t really sat down and done the numbers; does anyone have a reason to think this isn’t a real concern? I’d love to stop worrying about it.
- nprateem 2y agoBilling alerts and don't piss people off. Or host on GH pages.
- mooreds 2y agoYes! Any time you are doing anything with AWS, set up billing alerts. You likely will never need them, but it is free insurance.
- jamesfinlayson 2y ago> does anyone have a reason to think this isn’t a real concern? I suppose it is, but it's possible for someone to DOS a $5/month server too (touch wood they don't). AWS could get expensive but it will always be up, so there's a trade-off there. You could use AWS WAF to mitigate someone running up your bill, but I'm not sure how well it works/how easy it is to configure/how cost-effective it is.
- rogerrogerr 2y agoDifference is that I don’t usually care if a static site gets DDoS’d - They’ll get bored eventually, and it’s not that important to have uptime. I do care about DDoS’ing my wallet.
- azemetre 2y agoIn your hypothetical scenario this is a potential problem regardless if you make static content or not. At least the static content is potentially less resource heavy but I don’t see how your concerns don’t apply to any online service.
- throwaway48540 2y agoPutting it on a $10 VPS means it costs $10 whatever happens. How to limit spend like this on static storage providers?
- 2y ago
- arresin 2y agoWhat even is JAMStack? To me it’s a meme that no one can explain yet fits what ever definition you want it to be.