issue_comments: 645067611
This data as json
html_url | issue_url | id | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions | issue | performed_via_github_app |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/236#issuecomment-645067611 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/236 | 645067611 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY0NTA2NzYxMQ== | 9599 | 2020-06-16T23:50:12Z | 2020-06-16T23:50:59Z | OWNER | As for your other questions:
Yes, exactly. I know this will limit the size of database that can be deployed (since Lambda has a 50MB total package limit as far as I can tell) but there are plenty of interesting databases that are small enough to fit there. The new EFS support for Lambda means that theoretically the size of database is now unlimited, which is really interesting. That's what got me inspired to take a look at a proof of concept in #850.
I personally like scale-to-zero because many of my projects are likely to receive very little traffic. So API GW first, and maybe ALB as an option later on for people operating at scale?
As you've found, the only native component is uvloop which is only needed if uvicorn is being used to serve requests.
For the eventual "datasette publish lambda" command I want whatever results in the smallest amount of inconvenience for users. I've been trying out Amazon SAM in #850 and it requires users to run Docker on their machines, which is a pretty huge barrier to entry! I don't have much experience with CloudFormation but it's probably a better bet, especially if you can "pip install" the dependencies needed to deploy with it. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
317001500 |