13 ms·
Laravel Cloud
- nik736 2y agoWhere is it hosted at?
- jspaetzel 2y agoAWS based on https://cloud.laravel.com/docs/pricing#compute https://cloud.laravel.com/docs/pricing#compute
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- thecleaner 2y agoWhy are cloud based open source things working now but failed the first time Heroku came around ?
- leetharris 2y agoLaravel is unique in that it has always had a lot of paid services based around it. There are a lot compared to other frameworks. If you go to Laravel's page you can see them all. One of my teams was using Forge and Envoyer probably 10 years ago. And nobody complains because they are completely optional and Taylor Otwell's team puts so much effort into the framework.
- bberenberg 2y agoIt like Wordpress but without the drama.
- nvahalik 2y ago> And nobody complains because they are completely optional and Taylor Otwell's team puts so much effort into the framework. And the team also dogfoods heavily. Laravel has excellent DX because the people building it use it to build those products.
- butlike 2y agoLaravel started out as a PHP Rails-clone, no?
- m-a-r-c-e-l 2y agocorrect
- augustohp 2y agoThere are a couple of reasons but I can cite a few, I tried to push for PaaS and failed the hard way: 1. No widespread practice of environment provisioning automation. Today Docker and k8s are ubiquitous. Having a list of requirements your application needs well kept were hard to find - which Heroku needs. 2. In the same sense as above, automated deployment was not a common thing. 3. Barriers to cloud adoption. Development tools were not widespread. Paying for software development and deployment is common now, it wasn't.
- thecodemonkey 2y agoReally excited for this! Had the opportunity to take part in early access over the last few weeks and the deployment process has been super smooth and insanely fast. I'm mostly just impressed with how polished everything feels and how easy it was to add database, key/value store, etc. Currently using Laravel Vapor for most of my hosting needs, but will be switching everything over to Cloud.
- ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 2y agoWhy would the deployment process be faster than anything else? Why Laravel cloud over anything else?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- vednig 2y agoThat's a nice one
- danpalmer 2y agoI'm surprised that there are new language specific hosting services like this cropping up. It just seems like the wrong level of abstraction, particularly for frameworks like this. Infrastructure makes sense at a few levels of abstraction... - Servers you can run what you like on – VMs, bare metal, etc. - Containers that you can put what you like in, but which run in some system you don't control – Kubernetes, ECS, even things like Heroku are here now. - Language specific micro-plugins, where a small piece of code is hosted in a common server process – AWS Lambda, Cloudflare workers, all the FaaS stuff. These are sometimes language specific, but I expect them to align on WASM. Being PHP and Laravel specific doesn't really fit any of these, it's a model that sort of existed around the early Heroku days, but seemed to lose out to first Heroku and its generic buildpack system, and then eventually to containers. What happens when a team wants to add a little Node process for some frontend thing? Do they need to move their entire hosting? Who is the target audience of a provider like this, and perhaps more importantly, can they stay with a provider like this for very long?
- martinsnow 2y agoSmall teams don't want to bother with hosting apps. Shipping features equals money.
- danpalmer 2y agoThat's not incompatible with my point though. I'd actually argue that pushing a Docker image is easier than pushing a raw codebase and having to figure out annoying build issues where your local environment differs from production – I've debugged that on Heroku in the past and it's a pain, but much less of a problem with Docker.
- tnolet 2y agoEasier to who? The audience here is folks that don’t want to wade into the murky Docker waters
- martinsnow 2y agoShipping a laravel image means shipping an image that does queues and an image that does web serving. There's a ton of complexity in that when you have to start scaling your queues independent of your web services. Edit: Okay so i realise typing from my phone doesn't help me get the message through i want. So laravel apps usually works by having jobs run in a cli process that's its own thing. It's still part of the same codebase as everything else, but when you run it, that's it. You just run a queue worker. Then you can run your application in web server mode, that's when your controllers and all the other shebang is served. Rest controllers, mvc and the other stuff. So in a typical configuration you run your application in 2 different services. One for queues and one for web. For queues there's a simple queue worker built in but there's also a more advanced called Laravel Horizon which can scale your queue worker processes on a machine. You can deploy as many of these as you want horizontally. Then you also control however many web servers you want to deploy. All of this sounds very easy, but it can be quite the headache to setup and maintain. So i think Laravel cloud is a good choice for small to medium teams who just wants to ship features and not want to bother with infrastructure, until the infrastructure starts to become constly.
- Dachande663 2y ago-
- theonething 2y agoWould you be willing to share what went wrong with your experience of Laravel? I haven't used it for over 5 years, but it was pretty pleasant when I did.
- duk 2y agocongrats!
- jppope 2y agoCongrats on the release. I'm interested to see how the project goes.
- conradfr 2y agoI'm still not sure why anybody would use Laravel instead of Symfony but Taylor Otwell bank account proves I'm apparently stupid.
- code_runner 2y agoin my experience, symfony looked like a massive, old, gross, enterprisy solution... laravel got as far out of my way as it could and had absolutely unbelievable documentation. I am not a php person, but was on a php project and we were trying to run absolutely as fast as we could.... and laravel let us do that very effectively. If i was a php greybeard or something maybe I would've preferred symfony... but looking at our legacy symphony system compared to the laravel system we stood up and replace it.... I cannot imagine making a different choice
- throitallaway 2y agoYes, and at this point Laravel has a healthy ecosystem built up around it. There's a large community, tons of plugins available, and professional support for it.
- 9dev 2y agoIf there’s one thing I hate about Laravel, it’s the docs. Some things are documented, arbitrary others aren’t; many APIs offer multiple aliases or equivalent ways to solve the same problem, and the docs use them interchangeably. Sometimes there’s multiple paragraphs for an obvious feature, but a single sentence for something complicated, and you’ll have to try for yourself to find out how it behaves.
- code_runner 2y agoThat’s fair in certain parts. I like the balance they struck (at the time at least) of not super in the weeds but not high level tutorial mode. A few things around their orm specifically were a little confusing or sparse at times if memory serves
- thomaslord 2y ago
- pier25 2y agoSo apps autosleep after a certain time. How long does it take for an app to wake up? Is this using firecracker like Fly?
- lowercased 2y agoThe intro video mentioned the serverless databases take about 200ms to wake from hibernation. No idea on app workers, but... I would think it's within that ballpark... ? Might also depend on the app server class you're using?
- pier25 2y agoThe serverless PG is provided by Neon so it's a different infra. Fly.io uses Firecracker[1] and it's usually pretty fast. Of course it will depend on app size etc but it's weird there's zero information about app start up time, cold starts, etc. [1] https://firecracker-microvm.github.io/ https://firecracker-microvm.github.io/
- dj_rhyme 2y ago[dead]
- MassiveQuasar 2y agoWhy do I need an account to view the docs?
- joelennon 2y agoWorks for me without signing in https://cloud.laravel.com/docs/intro https://cloud.laravel.com/docs/intro
- jtwaleson 2y agoWe need more standardization in the software world so that we can reason about how the systems work. Laravel and this new offering are a great example of that. Bravo!
- tnolet 2y agoKinda annoying I have to put in a CC before starting a free $0 plan.
- mylonov 2y agoSome things are free (like 10Gb traffic), but storage for example is not. So you don't pay for the account, but you need to pay for usage.
- jay-barronville 2y agoI was a Laravel user for years and I was a speaker at the very first Laracon in 2013. Although I don’t really use PHP/Laravel professionally anymore (with the exception of a project at my job a couple years ago, a few personal projects over the past 5 years, and a project I maintain every now and then for an old client), every time I look at all of the progress Taylor Otwell and the team have made over the years (without sacrificing the experience or ecosystem) while elevating the PHP ecosystem along with them, I’m just in awe. I’ve said this before [0][0] and I’ll say it again: I truly admire Taylor—he’s one of those rare and brilliant humans whose contributions and work leave a personal lasting impact on you. Congratulations on launching Laravel Cloud! [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38596346 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38596346
- Bilal_io 2y ago$20 is too high for small sites and hobby projects that wish to use custom domains.
- fnord77 2y agolike cockroaches, PHP will be around long after humanity dies out
- capitanazo77 2y agoit's $240 per year for an app in production, plus $6 for the domain plus compute costs. with that money you can pay claude to dockerize and deploy to a vps
- radicalriddler 2y agoAnnoying there's no sqlite option. Not enough money in it? Difficult?
- yurishimo 2y agoYou don’t need a separate gui config for SQLite. Just modify the env to a path on disk and send it.
- dcchambers 2y agoVery interesting to see Laravel pivot to this direction (VC-backed cloud deployment and hosting solution) while Rails pivots the other way (Kamal deploy with bring-your-own cloud/provider/server). Obviously you can still (for now, anyway) 100% run Laravel independently without Laravel cloud or any of the optional paid Laravel features. But you don't have to squint too hard to see the Laravel core team starting to prioritize features that benefit Laravel Cloud and then slowly start building Laravel Cloud-only features. Especially as VC demands larger returns. I have a lot of respect for Taylor Otwell and I am happy he's found a way to continue to monetize his life's work, but I hope they're able to find a sustainable balance between free/open source work and paid/proprietary work.
- yurishimo 2y agoI think we need another year or two to see how this pans out. Supposedly the Laravel team has features for Forge on their roadmap. I’ve listened to quite a few podcasts with Taylor speaking on this topic and he’s very aware that the majority of Laravel devs know that hosting a PHP app is not rocket science. He wanted to built a platform that offered a substantial bump to the UX of managing servers but realizes that it will never be a solution used by companies that want to fine tune the software or do weird shit. Given the track record of Laravel so far, I’m willing to hear them out and let them cook for a bit before casting judgement. Taylor has also said he’s not in it for the money but only time will tell if he can hold onto that ideal as time marches forward.
- dcchambers 2y agoOh absolutely.
- angelomandato 2y agoGreat! This is just another option. I still brew my own hosting for Laravel sites for the sake of manageability and security. For most people who do not have that infrastructure skill set these cloud options give them freedom from being forced to create their one IaC and deployment pipelines. This lets Laravel startups get further along. Honestly I foresee Laravel based sites displacing the WordPress space, it will only be a matter of time before services like GoDaddy and Bluehost offer Laravel hosting options.
- big_paps 2y agoToday, after some years of not using Laravel, i took a glance at their website, planing to eventually use Laravel for a small project. I was completely shied away by their super marketing strategy and their hundreds of "super useful" packages with all their glorious names.
- ryanmccullagh 2y agoThis is a clone of Amezmo, which started in 2019. I see they ripped off every feature that we innovated. It’s actually quite flattering.
- dumbledoren 2y agoThis looks similar to WP Cloud. It provides WordPress as a service. Its one level higher abstraction than Laravel - Laravel is a framework, WordPress is an app. Though some say WordPress is now a website framework... https://wp.cloud https://wp.cloud