I am learning Strapi and Next.js and it appears in the tutorials I am coming across that they always deploy the frontend and backend separately. Why is this? What is the benefit? Wouldn't it makes sense to have one repo for the whole project and do one deploy?
Help!
Normally I like to work separately, because if you have a small update on the front, for example, it would not be necessary to deploy the entire application unnecessarily. These are responsibilities that, from my point of view, it is possible to deal with separately.
Related
I am developing monolithic applications since many years and want to try microservices and containers now.
For learning microservices and containers I am planning a small calendar application (as a web application), where you can create dates and invite others to them. I identified three services that I have to implement:
Authentication service -> handles login, gives back a JWT
UserData services -> handles registration, shows user data, handles edits of user data (profile picture, name, short description)
Calendar service -> for creating, editing and deleting dates, inviting others to dates, viewing dates and so on.
This is the part I feel confident about, but if I did already something wrong, please correct me.
Where I am not sure what to do is how to implement the database and frontend part.
Database
I never used Neo4j or any graphbased database before, but they seem to work well for this use case and I want to learn something new. Maybe my database choice may not be relevant here, but my question is:
Should every microservice have its own database or should they access the same database?
Some data sets are connected, like every date has a creator and multiple participants.
And should the database run in a container or should it be hosted on the server directly? (I want to self-host the database)
For storing profile pictures I decided to use a shared container volume, so multiple instances of a service can access the same files. But I never used containers before, so if you have a better idea, I am open to hear it.
Frontend
Should I build a single (monolithic) frontend application, or is it useful to build some kind of micro frontend, which contains only a navigation and loads other parts like the calendar view or user data view from the above defined services? And if yes, should I pack the UserData frontend and the UserData service into one container?
MVP
I want the whole application to be useable by others, so they can install it on their own servers/cloud. Is it possible to pack the whole application (all services and frontend) into one package and make it installable in kubernetes with a single step, but in a way, that each service still has its own container? In my head this sounds necessary, because the calendar service won’t work without the userdata service, because every date needs a user who creates it.
Additional optional services
Imagine I want to add some additional but optional features like real time chat. What is the best way to check if these features are installed? Should I add a management service which checks which services exist and tells the frontend which navigation links it should show, or should the frontend application ping all possible services to check if they are installed?
I know, these are many questions, but I think they are tied together, because choices on one part can influence others.
I am looking forward for your answers.
I'm further along than you but far from "microservice expert". But I'll try my best:
Should every microservice have its own database or should they access the same database?
The rule of thumb is that a microservice should have its own database. This decouples them, making it so that your contract between services is just the API. Furthermore it keeps the logic simpler within a service in that there's less types for data that your service is responsible for handling.
And should the database run in a container or should it be hosted on the server directly?
I'm not a fan of running a database in a container. In general, a database:
can consume a lot of resources (depending on the query)
sustains long-lived connections
is something you vertically scale, rather than horizontally
These qualities reflect a poor case for containerization, imho.
For storing profile pictures I decided to use a shared container volume
Nothing wrong with this, but using cloud storage like Amazon S3 is a popular move here, just so you don't have to manage the state of the volume. i.e. if the volume goes away, do you still want your pictures around?
Should I build a single (monolithic) frontend application?
I would say yes: this is would be the simplest approach. The other big motivation for microservices is to allow separate development teams to work independently. If that's not the case here, I think you should avoid yourself the headache for micro-frontends.
And if yes, should I pack the UserData frontend and the UserData service into one container?
I'm not sure I perfectly understand here. I think it's fine to have the frontend and backend service as part of the same codebase, which can get "deployed" together. How you want to serve the frontend is completely up to you and how it's implemented. Some like to serve it through a CDN to minimize latency, but I've never seen the need.
Is it possible to pack the whole application (all services and frontend) into one package and make it installable in kubernetes with a single step?
This is use-case for Helm charts: A package manager for kubernetes.
Imagine I want to add some additional but optional features like real time chat. What is the best way to check if these features are installed? Should I add a management service which checks which services exist and tells the frontend which navigation links it should show, or should the frontend application ping all possible services to check if they are installed?
There's a thin line between what you're describing and monitoring. If it were me, I'd pick the service that radiates this information and just set some booleans in a config file or something. That's because this state is isn't going to change until reinstall, so there's no need to check it on an interval.
--
Those were my thoughts but, as with all things architecture, there's no universal truth. Some times exceptions are warranted depending on your actual circumstances.
I am working on a GRANDstack (GraphQL-React-Apollo-Neo4jDatabase) project and got told that it now needs an additional REST-API without making huge changes to the existing backend and GraphQL-API. And of course we have to be quick about it.
We found this (Apollo Gateway): https://medium.com/tkssharma/an-api-gateway-is-a-microservice-pattern-where-a-separate-service-is-built-to-sit-in-front-of-your-be4b16861d40
We plan on using this to set that new REST-API on top because we know we will need microservices soon enough as well. So I guess, this can be set up in some form with the already included Apollo. But I have yet to fully understand it.
Does anyone have some experience with this? Or does anyone know a project that implements this and can be checked out? I'd like more material about this that contains actual code. Especially about setting up such a gateway to put a REST-API on top.
If there is something easier and better documented than this Apollo gateway, please let me know! Open to ideas, but not complete overkills (Though we are not allowed to just put REST directly into our backend, it has to stay quite untouched).
Thank you very much!
In short: Our current backend offers GraphQL-API which works just fine. But one of our customers (in this picture "client") needs a REST-API. So we hope on using a gateway (?) which should be placed before/upon our backend in a separate docker container probably, takes in HTTP-requests from the user and then asks our backend in graphQL for the needed data.
If anyone ever stumbles upon this, we decided to do the following:
Since we have to be quick about it, we will set up another docker container, that contains a small server, which accepts data via a REST-API. Depending on the received data, it calls specific GraphQL-Queries/Mutations on our backend. Easy. No additional 3rd-party software. Simple just wins.
Have a good one!
I need some help with deciding on the architecture of my project (a web app for unlocking discounts). I am first planning on creating the website (React for the front-end & Django for the back-end, PostgreSQL database). In the future, I may create a mobile app too for Android & iOS (unsure what front-end framework yet).
So I have decided I want the front-end and back-end to be completely separated so the back-end is a REST api. This will allow me to not have to create multiple back-ends for mobile apps.
But, after researching, I have found that this could be quite expensive in terms of server costs. This is a new business and I am the only developer so funding isn't high. So I was thinking that I could deploy the front-end & back-end on the same server but as separate apps that talk via nginx?
I have 4 questions about this:
If I do this, would it still be possible to reuse the back-end as a REST api for the mobile apps or is that a no because it's linked to the web front-end?
If it is possible, would I be able to host the mobile front-end in the same server (so have everything hosted on 1 server)?
Is this a stupid idea - would I just be better off deploying everything into separate servers in the long-run (to reduce load)?
Should I just worry about this in the future? And for now just deploy the separated web front-end & back-end to the same server.
I have never really deployed anything into a real life production environment so I'm sorry if my questions seem silly. I haven't started development yet but I want to think about scalability & future extensibility before I start. Thank you.
Nowadays I'd go with a serverless approach. Instead of having servers to maintain you can focus on your app functionalities.
There are a lot of options. You can check, for example, AWS Amplify (https://aws.amazon.com/amplify/) or Netlify (https://www.netlify.com/) for a more "full-stack" approach.
In AWS, you also can keep separated projects, having your backend in lambdas and your frontend served through S3 + CloudFront. You also don't have servers to care about.
There are only examples of how you can solve your problem without servers, but answering your questions:
You can reuse your APIs regardless of the way your app is deployed. It will be more related to how you designed them;
Yes, you can host everything in a single server if you want, but I really don't recommend that;
If you don't want to pay for 24/7 servers, you can go for a serverless approach;
As I told you before, you can do what you want without worrying about servers.
Your main point of focus is to keep the cost lower and to implement a good solution also. My suggestion would be to look for AWS Lightsail. Lightsail offers fixed price VM which you can configure yourself, and it starts from $3.5 / month at the time of writing this answer.
My answers to your questions
If I do this, would it still be possible to reuse the back-end as a REST api for the mobile apps or is that a no because it's linked to the web front-end?
Yes, it's possible. Keep the frontend and backend in different repo, and you can deploy it as docker instances on the same server. You will have 1 frontend docker container and 1 backend docker container, and they can communicate with each other.
If it is possible, would I be able to host the mobile front-end in the same server (so have everything hosted on 1 server)?
For mobile, you will develop a mobile application which you can publish to playstore or deploy to smartphone. Your app can then call the backend service and get the JSON in response. So you have to design your backend in such a way that it can serve data to both requests.
Is this a stupid idea - would I just be better off deploying everything into separate servers in the long-run (to reduce load)?
For long term and design perspective, you need to consider factors like scalability, maintainability, security etc.., so its always better to have multiple server to avoid single point of failure.
Should I just worry about this in the future? And for now just deploy the separated web front-end & back-end to the same server.
My advice to you will be to think carefully now, so you don't get nightmares in the future. Invest your time now and design a stable solution which could help you in long-term. As you mentioned that its a small business, but your solution should be able to easy handle growth.
My suggestion
As suggested by the Paulo, S3 + CloudFront looks good for frontend. You can get 1 year free CDN using Lightsail.
For Backend, you should at least have 2 (I will suggest minimum 3) servers and deploy backend docker containers. You can use docker compose to automate the deployment. If you want to orchestrate then Docker Swarm Mode is best. With this you will avoid single point of failure. You can get very affordable servers from Amazon Lightsail
For database, you need to make it scalable. To ensure scalability and High Avalability we should have replicated DB. Minimum 3 DB instances will be good starting point. MongoDB is a good choice. With simple configuration you can enable DB replication. 1 Master 2 slaves instances.
1 Load-balancer in front of your servers to distribute the load. To save the cost you can configure the Load-balancer yourself but this will add learning curve and you will have to spent time and understanding the details. The better solution is to use a managed load balancer. Lightsail offers Load Balancer for $18 / month at the time writing this answer.
The above mentioned solution is cost-effective and will give you long-term benefit and also you can estimate the cost based on your solution.
Obviously, this can still be improved but I tried to cover the necessary aspects of the question asked.
We are currently serving around 140 webapps created by a bunch of different web agencies. The setup is the usual LEMP stack.
A 1.2 k8s cluster has been installed to migrate them as micro-services.
The problem we are facing is about serving static and dynamic content.
For this purpose we use, of course, two different containers (nginx and php-fpm) but we can't find an adequate solution to share data on both of them.
We hoped to be able to use versioned data containers but it is apparently not in the scope of k8s. Too bad.
gitRepo is not an option as we don't want to be dependent of a working git infra to instance pods. If it doesn't work we want to be autonomous and be able to serve traffic.
The other options (flocker, etc.) look heavy and complex in comparison to a simple data container. We also would like to be independent of data storage.
Is there an option I am not aware of? Does anyone have an advise on this?
Let me emphasise that we want to be able to version things in order to roll forward / backward easily.
Thank you for your time
I'm in the process of designing a cloud deployed website for a new solution my company is looking to provide. I have been attempting to answer a few questions and haven't had any luck, so when in rome.
First, I don't want the website to be stuck to any one particular framework. I know there is no way to completely future proof a website, but I would rather not put all of our eggs in one basket.
Secondly, I want to have a separation between the front and back end entirely. I have a list of reasons why I'm looking to do this, don't necessarily want to get into the conversation of what they are. Server Side rendering for the most part is out of the question.
So where does that leave me?
My initial thoughts on the design are to have a REST API that can be accessed for any API calls (this may be turned to GraphQL in the future).
The design decisions that I'm mostly wresting with are for the front end. The website will be a dashboard type system, where tenants can log in and see screens for them.
I was thinking that I would have a sort of shell, that hooks on to the index.html. This would have it's own routing, that would render micro-applications that are completely separate from the shell logic.
So for example, if I load index.html, path being "/"
It has some routes that it's responsible for, lets say
"/todos"
"/account"
If I accessed the /todos route, my shell application would then render that micro app. This application would be completely separate from the shell, except some data that might be loaded via the window. Once this application is rendered via the shell application.
So my todos route, for example, could be a redux application that's independent. It could have it's own routing, etc.
Is this is a common architecture? Are there any examples of this? Is there a better way of going about this?
Thanks for any insight!
Sounds like your well and truly over engineering this beast.
You may take on such an architecture for a HUGE build with many dev teams all working separately. Small agile team, the above would create so much overhead in boilerplate and brain ache in context switching between each "app"
Micro-service architecture is seriously great. Just don't break it up too small, read your use case well and break your services up accordingly.
For example: we are a team of 3. We have a pretty large-ish app devised into:
Php API
Backend management interface (redux)
Frontend website (html, react, php)
Search service (elastic search)
Cache (redis)
Data store (mysql)
All on running in multiple docker containers across multiple hosts. Pull down the backend.. Fine the frontend website is still up and running!