Startup: get the Heroku experience on your AWS account
Heroku is simple but limited for startups
However, for startups, Heroku has limitations like:
- Heroku is for individual developers and not for a team of developers
- Heroku does not support micro-services
- Heroku is very expensive (and AWS give free credits)
- Heroku has tons of other restrictions that can impact your business
Those arguments make most startups move away from Heroku to a more flexible place like AWS - which has 31% market share in Q2 2020.
AWS is complex for startups
When I used to play with AWS for the first time (2012) I was impressed by the flexibility that the platform brings. In a couple of clicks, you can have any services - broker, database, compute instances... There is no need to order a server, install Linux, and do administration stuff like ten years ago. It's amazing.
Since then, more than 170 services are now existing, and I feel like there are too many services - sometimes duplicated and responding to the same need. To deploy an application, which one to choose between EC2, ECS, Fargate, and EKS?
Plus, the difference with Heroku is that you need to spend/waste time configuring the network (VPC), configuring a Continuous Integration, configuring a Continuous Deployment, your domains on AWS... All of this is the job of DevOps.
I spent eight months creating our infrastructure with EKS on AWS; it takes time, is not cost-effective, and I spent time away from our product, which was not good - Mario Matar - CTO @ Monbanquet
Qovery - The Heroku experience on your AWS account
It was with the philosophy of putting the Heroku experience into AWS in mind that I created Qovery, a DevOps Automation tool for developers to help them to deploy their applications on their AWS account in just a few seconds and without any AWS knowledge.
Qovery combines Heroku's simplicity and the flexibility of AWS inside an outstanding user experience (UX).
The only thing you need to do as a developer is to put a .qovery.yml file at the root of your project, declare the dependencies you need (database, storage, custom domain...), and then push your changes to git, and that's it. Qovery deploys your application on your AWS account.
Behind the scene, Qovery hooks events from your git repository and manages everything as DevOps will do. You do not need to worry about micro details, such as network configuration, databases, and required services. Qovery takes care of all of this.
Beyond application deployment
Simplifying the User Experience does not mean limiting it. Qovery does the opposite, improving developer productivity with GitOps, Continuous Integration, and Feature Branching concepts.
Each git work branch (master, staging, feature_1) is an isolated "environment" that allows you to safely work in teams without ever stepping on each other's toes. This is something Heroku does not offer and is very difficult to bring to AWS.
Qovery also supports:
- Smart cost optimization to reduce your Cloud cost up to 60%
- Google Cloud Platform, Azure, Digital Ocean, and Scaleway Cloud providers
Two offers, one interface
Community: free for your personal projects - limitation: you cannot deploy your applications on your AWS account.
Business: take advantage of all great features (team management, cost optimization...) of Qovery and deploy your applications to your AWS account.
I'd like to try this, how do I get started?
Great! The first step is to book a demo with our team to learn more about your use case. After this initial chat, we'll invite you to try Qovery.
So join us now!
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
Suggested articles
The part teams consistently underestimate is that OPA Gatekeeper, the tool most people reach for first, only enforces policy at the cluster level. It blocks non-compliant resources from being created within a single cluster. Propagating consistent Gatekeeper policies across 300 clusters, and detecting when those policies drift, is a fleet orchestration problem that Gatekeeper was not designed to solve.
Training a model in a notebook is easy. What breaks teams is the step after, serving it reliably without haemorrhaging cloud budget or burying your SREs in YAML. The common trap: picking a platform that handles the model but not the surrounding stack. An AI deployment platform should orchestrate the full application graph (inference endpoints, vector databases, caching layers, and frontends) inside a single VPC, with GPU autoscaling that doesn't require a dedicated platform engineer to babysit.
The mistake teams make early is assuming Kubernetes namespaces provide sufficient isolation between workloads or teams. They do not. Namespaces share the control plane, the node pool, and the underlying network fabric. A misconfigured workload in one namespace can exhaust node capacity or crash the API server for every other namespace simultaneously. That is when the multi-cluster conversation starts.
Migrating from nginx Ingress to Envoy Gateway? Discover how Alan migrated 100+ services in one month, the technical hurdles they faced (like Content-Length normalization), and why staging isn't always enough.
Kubernetes assigns an entire physical GPU to a single pod by default. NVIDIA MIG solves the hardware partitioning side: one A100 becomes up to seven isolated slices. The part teams underestimate is the orchestration layer: device plugin configuration, node labeling, taints, and pod affinity rules all need to be correct before Kubernetes can actually schedule onto those slices.
The cluster coming up is the easy part. What catches teams off guard is what happens six months later: certificates expire without a single alert, node pools run at 40% over-provisioned because nobody revisited the initial resource requests, and a manual kubectl patch applied during a 2am incident is now permanent state. Agentic control planes enforce declared state continuously. Monitoring tools just report the problem.
The instinct when setting up Kubernetes observability is to instrument everything and send it all to your APM vendor. That works fine at ten nodes. At a hundred, the bill becomes a board-level conversation. The less obvious problem is the fix most teams reach for: aggressive sampling. That is how intermittent failures affecting 1% of requests disappear from your monitoring entirely.
Scaling your deployments to zero is only half the battle. If your cluster autoscaler does not aggressively bin-pack and terminate the underlying worker nodes, you are still paying for idle metal. True environment sleeping requires tight integration between your ingress layer and your node provisioner to actually realize FinOps savings.
.webp)