I Rewrote My Back End in Go in 72 Hours and Cut My AWS Bill by 94% (bajura.online)
nhumrich 12 hours ago
maipen 11 hours ago
2000 req per minute is pretty low. This was nothing but an example of overengineering.
chmod775 7 hours ago
In our world I'm not sure whether a human even read the entire thing before publishing it. There's absolutely nothing of substance in here.
amatecha 7 hours ago
exabrial 13 hours ago
jezek2 10 hours ago
The traffic is about 100x more expensive on "the cloud" and it killed all the ideas I had for cloud usage. Clouds are not worth it, even for scaling you can always rent more VPSes (or dedicated servers for heavy projects).
pjmlp 15 hours ago
Apparently Tiger Beetle also started in node, before the founder reached out for Zig.
Meanwhile all JavaScript tooling is being rewritten in Go and Rust.
Maybe it is time to finally grasp it should be left to the browser?
jdboyd 13 hours ago
aeve890 12 hours ago
lmz 11 hours ago
Example: https://perlhacks.com/2026/07/remember-perlscript-when-inter...
mitxela 8 hours ago
lmz 7 hours ago
phlogisticfugu 11 hours ago
zem 11 hours ago
peter_d_sherman 10 hours ago
I'm not going to give you a lecture. Here are the concrete numbers: RAM — the real deal
Node.js, on my latest version, was using 1.4 GB of RAM just to boot the app on one instance.
Go?
48 MB.
I'm not kidding. On the first test I ran, I launched a 15 MB Go binary on a t3.micro. The API responded in 20ms. I thought I'd measured wrong. I checked three times. It wasn't a mistake."
There is definitely something to be said for a self-contained high-performance server in 48 MB...
odilelof 19 hours ago
abdullah2993 15 hours ago
odilelof 15 hours ago
mywittyname 13 hours ago
mitxela 9 hours ago
CodeWriter23 12 hours ago
cluckindan 11 hours ago
WesolyKubeczek 12 hours ago
If it indeed took this little time, I strongly suspect the backend wasn't doing too much in the first place. Usually you can rewrite those quickly and demonstrate speedups. Some real big software that had a misfortune to have been written in something interpreted and inferior, might be more problematic, especially if you can't afford downtime or are unsure about all important corner cases, and when the program itself is your only documentation.
Another thing that was very jarring was that the article as a whole sounded very LLMese. Or PowerPointy? Take your pick. This little example screams that an LLM might likely have writen it:
> I'm not going to give you a lecture. Here are the concrete numbers:
> RAM — the real deal
>
> Node.js, on my latest version, was using 1.4 GB of RAM just to boot the app on one instance.
>
> Go? 48 MB. I'm not kidding.
When talking to LLMs, I cannot now unsee how often they feel a need to assert something is real and they are not making things up. When I see this much LLM-like writing, I'm asking myself, maybe this all is made up? A plausible story, but maybe it never happened? Why would I spend my time reading it?saejox 13 hours ago
it used to be a gigantic endeavor. now a few days work.