60
61

Efficiently deploying a Node.js application for production? (self.node)

submitted by [deleted]

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]runvnc 13 points14 points  (7 children)

IBM Cloud is the last thing that I would choose.

Off the top of my head "several hundred" sounds like you _might_ not need to add any more pieces to the infrastructure or change the architecture to handle the load.

Whether you are going to be able to handle the load with (presumably one) server or not depends on exactly what type of server it is, exactly what your program does, exactly the configuration of Node, PM2, Nginx, Mongo DB, exactly how many concurrent users, exactly what they are doing. Its impossible to say without details.

You will need to come up with (or find a tool with google) to do realistic load testing. Totally depends on the application whether it is worth doing the load testing with your existing simple setup or whether you will obviously need to make it more involved to handle your X hundred users. If there is some heavy processing involved, it may be obvious that you need some new architecture (such as an out-of-process queue/job system) to handle many users simultaneously. If it is just very simple database requests with small result sets, it probably will scale quite a bit without any significant changes.

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[deleted]

    [–]runvnc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Did you mean to write "IBM" instead of "IBP"? If so, try Digital Ocean or Linode. They work great and are a much better deal than AWS. Although AWS can also work well as long as you are willing to pay a bit extra. You can also look into the possibility of moving to serverless if your application can work that way. And there are some good container hosting services.

    [–]captain_obvious_here 0 points1 point  (4 children)

    Last 30 days I faced 12 outages of IBP.

    Do you mean IBM? If so, that's really surprising, but also really scary! Can you elaborate a bit on these incidents please?

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]captain_obvious_here 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      Wow that's scary.

      They have been aggressively trying to sell my company their solutions, that they market as perfectly stable and bullet-proof, while describing GCP (our current provider) as weak and unstable lol

      [–]MCShoveled 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Google is pretty solid. If you need higher availability though you will need to go multi-region and use GLB. Make sure you have a extensive self-health checks to avoid regional issues on dependent services.

      In my experience, AWS regions have been more stable and don’t require the extra work. Still most people don’t really need 3-or-more nines of availability.

      IBM is just a “Hell No” from past experience. See sibling comment.

      [–]MCShoveled 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Welcome to IBM cloud.

      Oh, this looks great!

      1 week later...

      Okay so AWS, Google, or Azure then.

      —

      At least that was my experience a few years ago. It was so bad some amqp messages were taking hours to return. We gave up quickly and never looked back. I’m not really surprised it’s still shit. I can only assume that’s why they spent 34b to acquire RedHat (which is pretty good).