"These platforms are genuinely pleasant to use. They smooth out development workflows and come packed with conveniences. Vercel and Netlify, for example, ship with global CDNs and edge networks out of the box to keep latency low. Most of them also handle scaling automatically, so traffic spikes don't immediately turn into operational problems. The downside is what comes with that convenience."
"I ran head-first into those limits while working on a side project with two internal services: a backend server and a Content Management System (CMS). Each needed its own Postgres "environment." In a shared setup, database migrations from the CMS kept wiping data created by the server. My first attempt at fixing this was straightforward: split things into separate schemas, cms alongside the default public. That should have worked. It didn't."
Platform as a Service providers like Vercel, Netlify, Neon, and Supabase offer near-zero setup hosting, global CDNs, edge networks, and automatic scaling that simplify deployments and reduce latency. Those conveniences come with trade-offs: limited infrastructure control and unpredictable pricing. A practical example: splitting a single Postgres instance into schemas failed because the provider restricted essential functionality behind a paid tier, breaking isolation between services. Cost surprises and vendor lock-in can be severe, with cases of companies returning to on-prem to save millions. Self-hosted PaaS solutions such as Coolify and Dokploy present an appealing alternative for control and predictable costs.
Read at LogRocket Blog
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]