Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | jasonmccay's comments login

If you are interested in the Jekyll / Github approach, you ought to check out Octopress (https://github.com/imathis/octopress) by Brandon Mathis.

It includes all the benefits of this approach, but with a nice out-of-the-box theme as well as useful helpers to make the blogging experience much better.

-----


Also https://github.com/developmentseed/jekyll-hook

-----


This may be true, but it also makes the common assumption that your time (or the time of your team) is somehow worth $0 dollars. But, I imagine that you would be the first to say that your time is worth much more than $0 dollars.

Put another way, hardware stores sell paint and paint supplies all day. Buying those and painting a room yourself is certainly cheaper, but it assumes you have the extra time to paint and don't mind you being the laborer. Hiring a painter costs more, but saves you a ton of time, energy, and elevates the level of expertise you are bringing to the job.

Getting started is one thing. The ease of how you maintain and grow is another.

-----


No, my assumption was that previously we had:

(Heroku Cost) <=> (EC2 Cost) + (EC2 DevOps Cost)

Now we have:

(Heroku Cost) <=> (EC2 Cost) + (EC2 Devops using Docker)

Where (EC2 Devops using Docker) < (EC2 Devops)

So the value proposition has shifted. It's not a "Heroku Killer", but it does dilute their value prop, as my prior post mentioned.

-----


This. No one ever factors in Ops time when I hear them complaining about Heroku.

-----


I'm not sure ops time is even the one to worry about. Most things I've learned I've learned the hard way. So a server going berserk isn't fun, but it's not like I just wasted either time or money on it. I learned something. I better understand my execution environment.

Downtime, on the other hand, is just lost revenue opportunity.

-----


I certainly do, and I can tell you the amount of time I've spent managing servers over the past year has cost us less than running our entire production stack on Heroku would have done. So has the odd bit of downtime we've encountered because I've not got the same level of experience as Heroku's ops team.

-----


I don't know, Docker + CoreOS is pretty dead simple.

-----


You realize that was resolved 1.5 years ago, right? Also, it was a driver-level implementation. Comments like this make you sound more troll and less informative.

-----


"Every single time we went from the 2-node primary site to the 3-node secondary" ... Can you explain what this means in terms of MongoDB?

-----


Yes, this. It is really stretching it to say that you can effectively "game" on your TV when airshare'ing from your iPad /iPhone to your Apple TV. It sucks.

-----


Sort of ... but there are pretty serious limitations.

1. You are locked into Rackspace as your provider. MongoHQ provides multiple cloud providers.

2. They force you to shard. This increases operational and application complexity ... and may not offer any real advantages for the amount of data that you have.

-----


I work for Rackspace.

On [1], you can actually keep your app in AWS and connect / migrate your data to OR over Direct Connect.

On [2], you don't have to shard. There is an option to scale vertically when you need to.

You can call RS people who can help guide you making the best decision on [1] or [2] based on your current and future situations.

-----


Isn't this just a link to an advertisement?

-----


People who swing hammers all day look at screwdrivers as the most confounding things. Why would you ever use a screw when you have nails?

-----


Man, I need to go break the news to our customers that are successfully inserting millions of documents per hour (and their apps running nicely ... probably an app you have used) to inform them that, in all reality, they are "failing miserably."

They'd be shocked(!) at the news. ;)

-----


Slower than Postgres ... ha.

-----


You're kinda all over the place trying to defend MongoDB...

So, what is your stake in it? You like it? You have a lot of customers on it and you want to validate your decision?

I'm just curious, because by my tastes, MongoDB is an awful database. It's like the PHP of Databases. It seems like there are a lot of better choices out there especially in the last few years.

-----


Considering MongoDB has only been around for the "last few years", I think it is maturing well. You are certainly free to call it the PHP of Databases, but there are a lot of developers that have learned to use it and are quite happy with it. Seems like most on Hacker News spend more time telling them why they are stupid than actually understanding the tool.

(Also, some guy by the name of Zuckerberg made a TON of money with PHP.)

Also, the tool is still in its toddler years ... and it is constantly compared to tools that have been around years longer (PG/MySQL). Comparing it to other NoSQL databases is just as silly (Riak, Cassandra) because they are completely different, have different constraints and are solving different problems.

There aren't better choices ... there are just different tools that are better for different jobs. It would be like looking at your toolbox and chunking everything but your saw or your hammer. Too many people are looking for the "technology to rule them all", but that doesn't (and shouldn't) exist.

-----


what is mongodb for then. what is the use case where it is better than the other tools?

-----

More

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: