Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Flynn vs Heroku: What are the differences?
Introduction
In this Markdown code, we will highlight the key differences between Flynn and Heroku. Flynn and Heroku are both Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) providers, but they have distinct features and functionalities that set them apart.
Scalability and flexibility: Flynn provides a more flexible and scalable approach for users, allowing them to easily scale their applications horizontally or vertically based on demand. On the other hand, Heroku offers a more limited scaling capability, primarily focused on horizontal scaling through dynos.
Containerization: Flynn utilizes containerization technology to provide a consistent and isolated runtime environment for applications. It supports various container technologies like Docker and provides better control over the runtime environment. In contrast, Heroku uses a similar containerization approach but abstracts away the underlying technology, providing a more simplified and user-friendly experience.
Deployment and management: Flynn offers a self-hosted solution, allowing users to deploy and manage their applications on their own infrastructure. This provides users with greater control and customization options. In comparison, Heroku provides a fully-hosted solution, handling the infrastructure and operational tasks, which can be convenient for users who prefer a managed service.
Application architecture: Flynn enables users to build and deploy their applications following a microservices architecture. It provides tools and features specifically designed to support microservices-based applications, such as service discovery, load balancing, and routing. Conversely, Heroku is more suitable for traditional monolithic applications and may not provide the same level of support and features for microservices.
Pricing model: Flynn offers a transparent and straightforward pricing model, where users only pay for the infrastructure resources they consume, such as CPU, memory, and storage. This allows for cost optimization and flexibility for users. On the other hand, Heroku adopts a more complex pricing model, taking into account factors like dyno types, add-ons, and usage. This can make it more challenging to estimate and manage costs effectively.
Integration ecosystem: Flynn provides a wide range of integration options and can be easily integrated with various third-party services, tools, and frameworks. This enables users to leverage their existing ecosystem and workflows. In contrast, while Heroku offers a decent set of integrations, it may have a more limited ecosystem compared to Flynn.
In summary, Flynn offers enhanced scalability, containerization control, self-hosted deployment, microservices support, transparent pricing, and a broader integration ecosystem compared to Heroku. However, Heroku provides a simpler and more managed experience, making it suitable for traditional monolithic applications and offering a larger number of hosted add-ons.
As I was running through freeCodeCamp's curriculum, I was becoming frustrated by Replit's black box nature as a shared server solution for Node app testing. I wanted to move into a proper workflow with Git and a dedicated deployment solution just for educational or non-commercial purposes. Heroku solved that for me in spades.
Not only does Heroku support free app deployment if you don't use their extra service handlers, but you can directly hook into your GitHub repos and automatically update the app whenever you commit to the main branch. It's a simple way to get an app running as fast as possible if you wish to share a proof of concept or prototype before moving to dedicated servers.
The Friendliest.app started on Heroku (both app and db) like most of my projects. The db on Heroku was on the cusp of becoming prohibitively expensive for this project.
After looking at options and reading recommendations we settled on Render to host both the application and db. Render's pricing model seems to scale more linearly with the application instead of the large pricing/performance jumps experienced with Heroku.
Migration to Render was extremely easy and we were able to complete both the db and application moves within 24 hours.
The only thing we're really missing on Render is a CLI. With Heroku, we could manage everything from the command line in VSCode. With Render, you need to use the web shell they provide.
I'm transitioning to Render from heroku. The pricing scale matches my usage scale, yet it's just as easy to deploy. It's removed a lot of the devops that I don't like to deal with on setting up my own raw *nix box and makes deployment simple and easy!
Clustering I don't use clustering features at the moment but when i need to set up clustering of nodes and discoverability, render will enable that where Heroku would require that I use an external service like redis.
Restarts The restarts are annoying. I understand the reasoning, but I'd rather watch my service if its got a memory leak and work to fix it than to just assume that it has memory leaks and needs to restart.
Pros of Flynn
- Free6
- Supports few types of containers:libvirt-lxc, docker5
- PostgreSQL HA2
- Easy setup2
- 12-factor methodology1
Pros of Heroku
- Easy deployment703
- Free for side projects459
- Huge time-saver374
- Simple scaling348
- Low devops skills required261
- Easy setup190
- Add-ons for almost everything174
- Beginner friendly153
- Better for startups150
- Low learning curve133
- Postgres hosting48
- Easy to add collaborators41
- Faster development30
- Awesome documentation24
- Simple rollback19
- Focus on product, not deployment19
- Natural companion for rails development15
- Easy integration15
- Great customer support12
- GitHub integration8
- Painless & well documented6
- No-ops6
- I love that they make it free to launch a side project4
- Free4
- Great UI3
- Just works3
- PostgreSQL forking and following2
- MySQL extension2
- Security1
- Able to host stuff good like Discord Bot1
- Sec0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Flynn
Cons of Heroku
- Super expensive27
- Not a whole lot of flexibility9
- No usable MySQL option7
- Storage7
- Low performance on free tier5
- 24/7 support is $1,000 per month2