menu

ZEIT

Our mission is to make cloud computing as easy and accessible as mobile computing. You can find our Next.js community here.

Channels
Team

clarify future support of docker on now platform

November 8, 2018 at 6:21pm
The ZEIT community has a new home. This thread is preserved for historical purposes. The content of this conversation may be innaccurrate or out of date. Go to new community home →

clarify future support of docker on now platform

November 8, 2018 at 6:21pm
It seems zeit is moving away from allowing customers to utilize Docker as a common 'primitive'; would you kindly clarify this?
Show previous messages

November 9, 2018 at 9:58pm
I tried, there doesn't seem to be a way to do that
  • reply
  • like
Gotcha. I suppose then it'd be another proprietary module I'd have to import that would only integrate with Zeit's cloud.
  • reply
  • like
yeah just discovering that too -- that's super concerning. , is there a way to downgrade to a legacy plan? I'm not able to deploy any of my apps to v2 and am now going to be paying $18 per month per deployment
  • reply
  • like
I wonder how many users that upgraded, don't know about this forced on-demand billing and will get a >$50 bill on a supposedly $15 plan
  • reply
  • like
we have a very clear disclaimer on the modal
  • reply
  • like
please email [email protected] and we'll take care of it, no stress
like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like
same for you Alin!
  • reply
  • like
Gotcha. I suppose then it'd be another proprietary module I'd have to import that would only integrate with Zeit's cloud.
not at all proprietary, and not at all specific to our cloud
  • reply
  • like
Meaning: it's just another API, like Stripe
  • reply
  • like
So you will support websockets in v2?
Edited
like-fill
1
  • reply
  • like
Let me tell you my use case: I'm developing a tcp server to listen to GPS devices to trigger that event to other microservices/lambdas. I hope Now V2 should support this specific use case without relying on 3rd party services like Pusher.js
Edited
  • reply
  • like
Do you confirm we can no longer chose the Premium/Pro/Advanced plans and that we are forced into On demand plan? (Now 1.0)
  • reply
  • like
thx for answering some questions here and shedding some light on the motivation to move to a lambda future for Now.
My last thoughts on this.
In terms of scalability your absolutely right lambda functions do scale very well. But you know what also scales really well? An index.html file on a cdn. The reality of real world applications is that there is often loads of complexity to deal with. As much as we engineers try to push back on the requirements there is often just no way around that.
Many of us have been to lambda land and saw it was not as elegant and graceful as it's often portrait in hello word examples. Maybe you guys can change that.
When you say: "We will provide good alternatives for the vast majority of use cases that are hard in a lambda environment." I really believe you and I think you and your team of awesome engineers will do a great job at that. But in this statement there also lies the problem. You will never be able to cater to everyone's needs. That's just what I liked so much about your "docker as a primitive" vision for cloud computing. You guys just needed to get really good/fast at orchestrating and optimizing docker containers and anything could be done on the service.
Building such a system, as you guys did, is probably hard as hell but I could not agree more with : "why the rush to get rid of serverless docker? It is still an amazing product, that has a massive competitive advantage over any other offering I've seen!"
I was so delighted to see all these new examples in the repository. Who ever thought we would be able to deploy Wordpress on Now. I just felt like you guys were really on to something revolutionary... and now you are just one of many.
Sorry if I sound harsh but you must understand that such a dramatic shift in the product direction is going to leave some customers/fans disappointed about the future of product. Than again, disappointing customers sometimes exactly what you have to do to achieve your vision.
I will try to move a few of my personal projects to v2. The company wide decision to move to Now is of the table for now.
like-fill
13
  • reply
  • like
Are there any other providers that allow you to upload a Dockerfile? Besides heroku? I don't know if I ever plan on moving to a serverless model. I could wrap my express app with /node-server , but I'm not sure that would provide out-of-the-box support for websockets.
  • reply
  • like
I'm not certain, at this point, if my entire app that I've built on express and FeathersJS would ever jive with serverless architecture. I feel it'd be a major rewrite.
  • reply
  • like
have you guys tried kubernetes? I got a kubernetes cluster setup in Google Cloud and now I just push docker images to it and it will host it for me
  • reply
  • like
I use Kubernetes on Google Cloud
  • reply
  • like
I don't get it. So with Docker, I can write and app, put it on now, or Digital Ocean, or if the client demands it, run Docker on their physical server in office, or unwrap what is in the Docker container and run it the old way on a real machine without the container...
With the new Now Lambda, I cannot do that. It will be suck require it to be hosed on NOW's platform. Surely, I can move it around on the cloud provider you guys support (AWS, GCE), but there is no way to deploy it to other standalone server / computers?
like-fill
5
  • reply
  • like
I was referring to the idea that if there was some sort of wrapper that turns my plain Python Flask app into a Now-compatible web app, i.e. it analyzes the routes in my Flask app and "magically" exposes each route as a standalone function that can be served through Lambda, then I'd write my Flask app as always, write a Dockerfile as always for on-premise (or generally non-Now) deployment, and deploy it on Now with the wrapper.
  • reply
  • like
Are there any other providers that allow you to upload a Dockerfile? Besides heroku? I don't know if I ever plan on moving to a serverless model. I could wrap my express app with /node-server , but I'm not sure that would provide out-of-the-box support for websockets.
Hyper.sh is the closest to the (old-) Now model, but as far as I know they require you to have an image stored in some registry before you can launch it there.
Edited
like-fill
3
  • reply
  • like
I get the idea and even though i wont go in that direction your expertise is propably right that this is the cheapest and best way to move forward. But however good it might be, it is still a lockin. It does not matter that i can choose where to distribute it behind the scenes. I can move a docker setup to wherever i want, even my own servers if i need to. With the new v2 this is a different story, it sounds way more locked in. And i kind of lost a good amount of trust atm. Maybe thats unfair and i am wrong. Actually i hope i am wrong 😕
Edited
  • reply
  • like
this is very concerning 🤔
  • reply
  • like
this is very concerning 🤔
  • reply
  • like
Ok guys - so I know it is not exactly polite to discuss other services in a chat that belongs to Zeit Now, but since Zeit is dressing nicely with its Lambda dress, for what I believe is a strategic move to get the attention of Amazon's acquisition team, and since it looks Docker will be gone forever from Now sometime soon, I feel obligated to share the results of my search for alternatives.
- Hyper.sh : even though it shares similarities to Now, it is much less user friendly. You need to worry about IPs and instance sizes, and the deployment process is quite painful and long. I managed to make it work, sometimes. One huge downside, is the fact that you need to have a docker image in DockerHub. After playing with it I cannot recommend it as an alternative, but it may still appeal to some people I guess.
- Docker on Heroku : I am a long time user of Heroku, using non-containerized applications. I just tried deploying one of my docker test apps to Heroku, and it was very easy and smooth, and even free. If anyone of you decides to go that route, I hope to save you some time by saying this: The only change you probably need to do to your Dockerfile, is to ensure your `CMD` uses the `$PORT` environment variable. This is the variable provided by Heroku, and the `EXPOSE` directive is ignored by Heroku.
Edited
like-fill
7
  • reply
  • like
Show more messages
private
This conversation has been locked
private
This channel has been archived