It'll take me far longer to figure out what FarGate and Cloudflare Pages and all these are and infinitely longer to keep up with the latest and greatest because it keeps changing constantly. And even once I get it, I'll have very limited control or understanding of my stack, and migration? I'm screwed. I'm not interested in playing games like that.
nginx is comparatively simple, run it, it serves. Config is easy, learn it once, run it anywhere, it doesn't get a dozen new features and breaking changes every month, just does its job.
I guess I'd just rather understand the real underlying technologies than some crappy commercial wrapper for them that will differ every time someone tries to rip me off.
I agree with you in principle, but in practice mthese services replace dozens of hours of banging your head against software that's one misstep from blowing your legs clean off.
Sometimes, you have better things to do than tweaking nginx configs using the average of a dozen tutorials and docs that might as well be written in middle English.
I don't have better things to do, which is why I bothered. I'm not sure if it was really worth it. Cloudflare took 5 minutes to set up.
And that's why I use Caddy.
Not so easy on these platforms.
Sure it is, if your needs are simple and you follow a tutorial and don't just randomly spam stuff into your config files. Nginx can get really really complicated but it doesn't have to.
> mthese services replace dozens of hours of banging your head against software that's one misstep from blowing your legs clean off.
Yes, you can definitely spend hours figuring out Nginx, but you can shoot your foot off with a PAAS just as easily and at least Nginx is a technology that you can use in many different situations. It's definitely worth learning a tool like that, versus a commercial service where you play in a sandbox and they can jack up the price or change the rules at any time.
This is written as a long-time web developer and sysadmin. A lot of comments like the above seem to be written to try to scare younger devs away from standard tools and into the arms of PAAS vendors.
Blame the user all you want, but after a decade of using nginx, I'm ready to claim that it's a pain to work with.
2) These technologies are stable and usually not that complicated. You are missing out on a lot of productivity by not looking into them.
Understanding the "real underlying technologies" is a myth. The "underlying technologies" are constantly changing, unless you are using an extremely outdated stack: https://www.youtube.com/live/hWjT_OOBdOc?feature=share.
If you time traveled someone from a decade ago that knows how to configure an Apache or NGinx server to today they would likely still be able to. It may not follow latest best practice, but at worst they'll use something retired, have to google it and be up and running in minutes.
Same with Spring/Java or .NET/ASP.NET Web API.
And you can still run a VPS or container that can handle significant traffic for free on many of the cloud platforms + migrating it is much much simpler.
My point is that you could make the whole "underlying technologies" argument for Apache back in the day when it was new. Why use Apache when I can understand the "underlying technologies"?
Things evolve over time and new tech slowly becomes so integrated into the stack that it is the underlying technology.
He even references webservers like Apache as part of this process: https://www.youtube.com/live/hWjT_OOBdOc?feature=share&t=765.
One is closer to the metal, so to speak, and provides a better basis for understanding how these cloud services (Lambda, etc) actually work behind the scenes. In this case, understanding the underlying technologies is not a myth.
So will also constantly change their behaviour in the edge cases. Thank you for giving me another reason for not using that crap. I'll stick with my extremely outdated stack.
Cloud and serverless platforms are similarly modern tech, except for deployment and hosting. Do you really think that e.g. AWS and Cloudflare "constantly change their behaviour in the edge cases"?
I use it for a few reasons. I like that it’s free and the hosting of the static content is at the edge. They also take care of some things automatically, like compressing the assets once at build time and serving them with the right headers.
I don’t think this is unique. I believe netlify and others have similar offerings. These providers are excellent for the use case of serving static content at low latency and low cost.
First, Fargate and CloudFlare Pages are completely different things. Fargate is "serverless" Kubernetes while Pages is just static hosting (if you don't count workers).
While you have a point about the former, you can't beat CF Pages (or Netlify, or Vercel, or any other modern static hosting system) in simplicity. You just push your changes to your own Github repo and it gets automagically deployed. It is also free up to the point your cheap dedicated can handle. Try it and you will be pleasantly surprised.
- You can develop a static (Hugo) web site then deploy it on Fly.io using containers.
or
- You can develop a container based web site, then deploy it on a bare Linux server (k8s is not necessary for a few containers).
Webflow, airtable, whalesync.
I could recreate one of his examples (https://oldgames.win/) in 10-20 minutes off just a CSV file... And I could use something like https://simplescraper.io/ to scrape that data + find imagery.
Hugo is wonderful, until a deployment bug or misconfiguration exposes all of your server settings in a page that should be serving a 404 instead. Wordpress, Hugo and others also get constant attacks from hackers who can exploit each bug found on thousands of sites all at once.
Go has fantastic server examples and plenty of starter templates you can use to build your own server, and deploy to Heroku and scale to millions of users far cheaper in engineering and financial terms.
Easier way > HTML + CSS + Javascript (vanilla or framework) + Server side language of choice.
Deploying is not building.
It leaves out some of the affordances that CF Pages, Vercel and Netlify provide. (Discussed as option 1 in the article). Those are of course moving targets that provide more stuff every few months.
Wordpress for blogs or websites on a shared host with automatic updates and a few select plugins? Yes. Laravel or Symphony for applications? Ok.
But just PHP has way too many footguns and doesn't provide nearly enough affordances to make them worth it IMO. Plus it's a language that breaks backwards compatibility way too often, stops support for older versions. You need some sort of protection layer that shields you from all of this. So you might end up with something that is way more complex and slow than it needs to be.
Laravel is a great way for a small team to get an application up and running quickly and really shouldn't be overlooked.
Do you have examples of such compatibility breakages?
I noticed Nextcloud and WordPress both seem to lag behind the last version of PHP a bit. But on the other hand I also see such thing in the Java World where people are stuck on Java 8 or 11, when backward compatibility is one of the strength of the language.
I also have PHP scripts I wrote for PHP 5.1 and still work unchanged on PHP 8.2, 12 years later. Well, I had to fix some warnings for completely dumb things I did like putting mandatory arguments after optional arguments and I'm not sure why it was working, but the upgrades have been painless for me.
Plus, I find the latest PHP version quite pleasant, with the type annotation and other new features of the language, and the execution model where your app doesn't run all the time, its php files are just called by the web server (though php-fpm). No Tomcat or uWSI or unicorn and virtualenvs to manage.
But I guess I'm a person who is "already invested/emerged in the language" :-)
(I'm also invested in Python, Java and Node.js though)
The wordpress integration test suite broke with PHP 8.0. They seem to be lagging behind for 8.1 and 8.2 as well. Remember new keywords were introduced and code just breaks in weird ways since these versions if you have conflicting names or depend on any library that has conflicting names.
There was a somewhat recent article that talked about changes for a string template literals cleanup for the next major version that will break a whole bunch of code as well.
In the near future you won't be able to assign new properties on instantiated objects anymore. Think anyone who is creating objects dynamically to be encoded as JSON, rendered as HTML, XML or generating them from parsing/reading any of those things. I expect a lot of breakage and patches here.
> I also have PHP scripts I wrote for PHP 5.1 and still work unchanged on PHP 8.2, 12 years later. Well, I had to fix some warnings for completely dumb things I did like putting mandatory arguments after optional arguments and I'm not sure why it was working, but the upgrades have been painless for me.
In many cases the warnings, improvements and deprecations make sense. If you have a few PHP projects and use decent tooling you can fix those things often easily and are sometimes glad for it. There might be hidden bugs that are discovered that way.
But what about many projects? What about transitive dependencies?
PHP is moving fast and makes no excuses. It's simply not a language that prioritizes stability. Often for good reason, but you have to ask yourself it the churn and instability is worth it.
> Plus, I find the latest PHP version quite pleasant, with the type annotation and other new features of the language, and the execution model where your app doesn't run all the time, its php files are just called by the web server (though php-fpm).
I agree on that last part. That's where PHP shines uniquely IMO. It's really optimized for stateless execution, which makes it very easy to reason about on a macro level.
But on a micro level it's tough. There are so many little gotchas and weird behaviors. A death by a thousand cuts.
It has many tools for the competent and the incompetent.
I'm sure your personal experience sucked, just like many people's personal experience with Java.
But let's not conflate the output of some set of practitioners with the design of the language. The fact that php can be so accommodating to the incompetent can be seen as a virtue. Dumpster fire makers can set things ablaze with any tool and the avalanches of trash PHP code are endless. It is what it is.
I havent ever had any PHP code I wrote get broken by a PHP update in over 20 years.
PHP is still the simplest way to get any API going.
This approach works pretty well when you have a pre-existing API and need to, say, minimize # of round trips to fetch data without wanting to couple your frontend(s)<->backend too tightly.
What does this look like in practice? Can someone provide example scenarios that this is describing?
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECS/latest/userguide/task-...
That's how I feel when I write a bunch of HTML and CSS files and send this to prod.
Less so with an app written with a JS framework of which I now need to maintain the dependencies.
This seems like “how to build a web app for a very tiny subset of people who don’t want to learn about deploying web apps”.
Maybe I’m in a bubble? It seems like 99% of the people I know actually running profitable companies have an infrastructure that roughly matches to “some Linux server somewhere”, and then upward from there it all just moves to AWS/azure, but it’s still just some Linux machines maybe with a load balancer in front of them.
If you’re writing software and don’t seem covered by this blog post, don’t feel like you’re out of the loop on something. I think this author is just writing about the subset of the ways that he knows about.
I mean honestly “HUGO static sites”…how about a directory of html files hosted by nginx or Apache?
1. Stateless static site. There is a variety of ways to build it (such as React or Svelte or purely by hand) and a variety of ways to host it (such as a directory of HTML files hosted by nginx).
2. Function services like Cloudflare workers, AWS Lambda, Google Cloud Functions, Azure Functions, etc. This is a way to store state without having to manage servers.
3. Single conventional Linux server.
4. Distributed containers.
All web developers should familiarize themselves with these 4 basic approaches and prefer them in approximately the order given. It's good to avoid jumping to distributed containers if you can get away with functions, a single Linux server, or even static HTML. It's also important to move down the list as the app grows rather than reinvent K8s.
That said, I agree with you about the other generalisations!
EDIT: actually, where do PaaSes fit into this taxomony? I'd argue that level 2 is actually the PaaS level. You might choose an edge PaaS (Workers), distributed (Fly.io), or centralised (Elastic Beanstalk) depending on your needs. But ultimately this level is: "I write code, you run it". FaaSes are a subset of PaaS providers which focus on stateless models, but there's no reason you can't combine FaaS for your code with a managed database offering.
I'm used to 3 tier legacy apps (web / app / dB) but I assumed that would fit into number 3 the best, I could be wrong...
Whether you put HTML files on the mentioned services or have a build step with a static site generator is not the point.
Where does your nginx server run, how do you keep it up and running, how you do provision it, how do your files end up on the server?
You can write a bunch of shell scripts and do all of this on a cheap VM for 5 bucks. Or you can get it for free on some of these services with git integration, global caching, web hooks, previews, cheap storage, image optimization etc. You get unlimited or at least a lot of sites and it's all automatic. On some you can even just drag and drop a directory into their web interface and the website is there in a couple of seconds.
It's basically a different layer of abstraction that's free/cheap and works nicely for simple use cases or as a specialized part of a more complex deployment architecture.
I have personally recommended netlify, cloudflare etc. to people who have the technical ability to write HTML/CSS or use a static site generator. Those things are very easy to use and carry around less risk than having to provision and configure a web server yourself.
Scale up from there as required.
-an old man yelling at the cloud.
It is trendy nowadays to just use SQLite for a single server claiming speed advantages, but there are disadvantages as well. In my last startup, our SQL server was not directly connected to the Internet, isolating it from potential hackers.
I believe the assumption is, if you need more than one server, using containers (option #4) is a better solution in general. Obviously this is not exactly true for your 1 server for app, 1 server for SQL server scenario, but might make sense for most setups.
Of course there is more to the platform than just that, but your code isn’t exactly unportable anyway.
[0]: https://blog.cloudflare.com/workerd-open-source-workers-runt...
IIRC all of the options listed still involve writing a Dockerfile, though. Render.com, Cyclic.sh, and Railway.app are also in that category(ish) but will automate the build more like Heroku. (this is off the top of my head, please correct if I misremembered anything)
My argument is not against innovation but against mindshare capture by platform capitalism.
Deploying using Docker containers means hosting multiple nested operating systems on multiple separate hardware, and then trying to coordinate them, when you most likely actually want them living on the same machine sharing the same loop back interface (like you have during development) or on the same physical or at least logical network with a hardware firewall between them. Instead, when you deploy Docker containers to the cloud, they are on different machines (often in different data centers) connected only by a VPC with only primitive software firewalling and no way to monitor the traffic.
Docker is meant to run isolated systems together, to share resources. You get none of that benefit. But the hosting provider does, at your cost.
Writing a Dockerfile is not harder than deploying to a bare metal server anyway.
On a more serious note - it is good to be aware and track how much we are tied to a given service. Because we might end up being taken hostage by the Cloud provider who can extort us for a long time before we manage to migrate.
Feel free to ping hn@withcoherence.com if we can answer any questions or help you get running…
But from the original post (OP) about "Four Ways" here, apparently I made a really big mistake, nope several biggies: I wrote the software using Windows 7 Professional, Visual Basic .NET, ASP.NET, ADO.NET, and SQL Server. What a user receives is old HTML and some CSS with little, maybe no, JavaScript. I didn't write any JavaScript at all, but ASP.NET wrote a little for me.
At one point, I wanted a key-value store so used two instances of one of the .NET collection classes instead of Redis. That was a biggie mistake?
So, apparently my work is none of the "Four Ways" of the OP. Biggie mistakes, right???
I don't get it: Looks to me like for some decades now, all around the world, people have been able to build (program, develop, etc.) Web sites using Windows 7, .NET, SQL Server.
E.g., as I recall, Markus Frind developed a Web site using those tools, had the usage grow, ..., and sold the site for $500+ million. He did something wrong?
Now there are some rules I don't know about, rules that say I must just junk my code, 100,000 lines of typing, and start over?????
Those "Four Ways", they include something for my use of collection classes as simple versions of Redis? Or they include Redis?
Oh, at it's core, my Web site has some original applied math -- those "Four Ways" have that already?
I didn't get the memo that I can't use Windows 7, .NET, and SQL Server!!!
What am I supposed to do, use better than Windows 7 Professional, .NET, SQL Server, and my applied math code????
