3 ms·

An old monolithic PHP application I worked on for over a decade wasn't set up with independent modules and the average deploy probably took a couple seconds, be

by trog 2y ago

An old monolithic PHP application I worked on for over a decade wasn't set up with independent modules and the average deploy probably took a couple seconds, because it was an svn up which only updated changed files. I frequently think about this when I watch my current workplace's node application go through a huge build process, spitting out a 70mb artifact which is then copied multiple times around the entire universe as a whole chonk before finally ending up where it needs to be several tens of minutes later.

fulafel 2y ago
Yeah, if something even simpler works, that's of course even better. I'd argue the difference between that PHP app and the Node app wasn't the lack of modularity, you could have a modulith with the same fast deploy. (But of course modulith is too just extra complexity if you don't need it)
withinboredom 2y ago
Even watching how php applications get deployed these days, where it goes through this huge thing and takes about the same amount of time to replace all the docker containers.
- trog 2y ago
  I avoid Docker for precisely that reason! I have one system running on Docker across our whole org - Stirling-PDF providing some basic PDF services for internal use. Each time I update it I have to watch it download 700mb of Docker stuff, instead of just doing an in-place upgrade of a few files. I get that there are advantages in shipping stuff like this. But having seen PHP stuff work for decades with in-place deploys and no build process I am just continually disappointed with how much worse the experience has become.
  - withinboredom 2y ago
    One approach I've seen rather successfully is to have a container that just contains the files to deploy, and another one for the runtime. You only need to update the runtime container ~ once a week or so (to get OS security updates), and the files container is literally just a COPY command to a volume. I've only seen that in one place, ever. Most people just do the insane 40 minute docker build -- though I've also seen some that take over 4 hours...
    - trog 2y ago
      That makes a lot of sense to me!
stickfigure 2y ago
> which only updated changed files You pay for this with the inability to maintain instance state (even caches) and a glacially slow runtime. It's a tradeoff.
- trog 2y ago
  Not sure what you mean about either of those two things? Never had any issues with instance state in our primary production environments, which were several instances of load balanced web servers. No idea what you're referring to as "slow"?

by trog 2y ago

fulafel 2y ago

Yeah, if something even simpler works, that's of course even better. I'd argue the difference between that PHP app and the Node app wasn't the lack of modularity, you could have a modulith with the same fast deploy. (But of course modulith is too just extra complexity if you don't need it)

withinboredom 2y ago

Even watching how php applications get deployed these days, where it goes through this huge thing and takes about the same amount of time to replace all the docker containers.

trog 2y ago
I avoid Docker for precisely that reason! I have one system running on Docker across our whole org - Stirling-PDF providing some basic PDF services for internal use. Each time I update it I have to watch it download 700mb of Docker stuff, instead of just doing an in-place upgrade of a few files. I get that there are advantages in shipping stuff like this. But having seen PHP stuff work for decades with in-place deploys and no build process I am just continually disappointed with how much worse the experience has become.
- withinboredom 2y ago
  One approach I've seen rather successfully is to have a container that just contains the files to deploy, and another one for the runtime. You only need to update the runtime container ~ once a week or so (to get OS security updates), and the files container is literally just a COPY command to a volume. I've only seen that in one place, ever. Most people just do the insane 40 minute docker build -- though I've also seen some that take over 4 hours...
  - trog 2y ago
    That makes a lot of sense to me!

stickfigure 2y ago

> which only updated changed files You pay for this with the inability to maintain instance state (even caches) and a glacially slow runtime. It's a tradeoff.

trog 2y ago
Not sure what you mean about either of those two things? Never had any issues with instance state in our primary production environments, which were several instances of load balanced web servers. No idea what you're referring to as "slow"?