How to use Amazon AWS and other PaaS services to spin up a web app - rkwz http://blog.snowplowanalytics.com/2015/07/28/how-to-use-amazon-aws-and-other-paas-services-to-spin-up-a-web-app/ ====== moe "Doing it on my own and not using CloudFlare or Amazon would have cost me $2, 000s more and required more server maintenance. My conclusion is that your time is better spent using PaaS rather than trying to do things on your own. I encourage you to give cloud computing a serious look. It is a very powerful and cost effective solution." For an _explanation_ of why this is overstated, check out this fantastic talk at this year's Cloud Summit by Werner Vogels (co-founder of Amazon.com). [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7NtG0p-q3k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7NtG0p-q3k) ~~~ brk In this case, the cost of the AWS stack is _far_ less than the cost of: \- Deploying on a VPS \- Deploying on a dedicated server \- Backups/archiving \- Scaling to meet peak load You have to be aware that the cost savings is not as great as you think. It is easy to be "lazy" in such matters and just blindly assume that anything and everything is cheaper when hosted with PaaS providers, but in the end, just about everything has a large fixed cost, especially in the beginning when it doesn't have a lot of traffic. You also have to account for the fact that Amazon has their own staff overhead, and their profit margins may also differ from the margin you need to make to keep the business afloat. In this case, it sounds like AWS "won" for the developer. But this same thing can just as easily go the other way. If your business scales quickly, can handle lots of traffic, but has a lot of expensive resource requirements, you're going to have to make some sacrifices and host your own servers. There are many valid reasons for choosing PaaS offerings. But it's important to be aware of the cost/benefits. There is no free lunch, except when you don't plan on eating lunch for a while. ~~~ moe _There is no free lunch_ I disagree; there's a lunch, it just happens to be $0.50 at McDonalds. _it just happens to be $0.50 at McDonalds._ It sounds like that's not the case here, but the point remains that it's far less expensive to run a cloud instance than even a VPS. My experience (several clients, very little AWS) has shown that instances can get you 80% of the way in terms of resource cost _and_ flexibility in much less than 20% of the total cost. ~~~ chiph The cost of a micro instance is $500/year or so for a single micro. (Or maybe $100 if you want it off-hour.) A VPS is likely $10-$15/month, per month, with a 30 day minimum. So yes, I agree with you, if your website isn't growing, going with a micro/small instance doesn't break the bank. (We've got ~75-100 requests/day). ------ rpeden I started using Heroku because I like paying for stuff I'm going to use and aren't going to use. And Heroku is the best value I've found for small scale apps. Once I got comfortable with it, I started adding the 'paid tier' features to the app to push it more towards production. I don't think I'll ever switch to AWS, but there's a cost-benefit analysis I'll continue to make as I expand my app over the years. If it's worth it, I'll add Heroku's paid features. If it ends up being not worth it, I'll switch to something else. (Of course, the same goes for any other tool I'm using, too. I try to keep costs as low as possible, but as a wise man once said, you do you.) ~~~ jacques_chester You would actually prefer the "Billing and Access" tab instead of the Dashboard? [https://dashboard.heroku.com/](https://dashboard.heroku.com/) This will give you the information you are looking for. The one-click deployment is nice for an initial push, but you're better off using the CLI for day-to-day development. ~~~ rpeden Yep. I had switched back to that tab after I first setup the Heroku Toolbelt (which was a great tool at the time, but not nearly as flexible as the CLI now is). So, now I go back and forth between it and the 'Starter' plan. I've been using the Heroku CLI more lately too, and it's an excellent tool! ------ dylz What would a no-cloud AWS stack look like? VPSes, dedicated servers, etc. A small self-hosted webapp. ~~~ rpeden Depends entirely on your workload and requirements. But, you're likely looking at VPS or dedicated servers running whatever OS you need to get the job done. The biggest savings from PaaS are going to come from the fact that it takes less effort to get to production. If you're building a small app that uses no complicated technology like Postgres or Redis or Memcache, it's easier to go with Heroku than using other PaaS providers, which would likely require configuring your own servers to run those services. ------ aagha For some folks, it's hard to let go of the "feel" of running your own servers, or what if you move to the cloud later? That's understandable, so I'll share my opinion: There are a number of very good resources that will help get you started. If you'd like to get even better advice and guidance on AWS, I'd highly recommend Amazon's own Webinar series. (See links below). The first session is a free one. AWS Webinars [http://aws.amazon.com/videos/](http://aws.amazon.com/videos/) I think AWS is getting easier to use. You'll never regret learning how to use Amazon's products. The AWS team has done a great job of providing a very simple interface for getting started, building an app and managing resources. And, if you're in a hurry, you don't have to think very hard to get started. Once you've learned the basics, you'll find that it's far easier than starting a traditional hosting company. What are the top reasons to go with AWS? (There's a good article here: [1]) 1\. Easy Scalability - Create as much, or as little infrastructure as you need 2\. Failover/Availability - Highly available and redundant architecture makes it simple to add more capacity when you need it. 3\. Data Location - With local copy of your data on the instance, in the cloud you're only charged for what you use, not how you use it. 4\. Control - Cloud is flexible. You can spin up more instances of what you're working on, add more storage, and even add software. With VPS or traditional hosting, it's more expensive to scale on that scale than for AWS. 5\. Security - AWS has one of the most reliable, secure hosting environments. 6\. Network Effect - The more people build on AWS, the better it gets. As the ecosystem grows, you'll find there's an even greater selection of hardware and services. 7\. Flexibility - You can build anything on AWS. I've built a small data storage system using MySQL and Amazon's SimpleDB. From there, you can build whatever you need. 8\. Portability - Once you've got your application built and deployed, if you wanted to take it and move it somewhere else, you could. And, with no down- time. Good luck. [1] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/14/top-10-reasons- web...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/14/top-10-reasons-web- hosting_n_1633116.html) ~~~ rohitv Webinar links: [https://www.lunchandlearn.com/p/1T2q5QoF8uU0M1W9A20yVNg#](